HomeMy WebLinkAboutPP-CUP-EA 16-394 - Supplemental InfoCeja, Eric
From: bonnie ardi <haybonnie@hotmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 11, 2018 10:07 AM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: Sands Apartment Project
April 11, 2018
Eric Ceja, Principal Planner, City of Palm Desert
73-510 Fred Waring Drive, Palm Desert 92260
eceia @ citvofoalmdesertora
Mr Ceja,
We are oppossed to this GIANT Structure called the Sands Apartment Project.
My husband and I are residents of the Venezia Community, we purchased our home in May of 2014. At the
time of purchase we were assured that the project next door would be a mirror image of the Cantarra Apartment
Complex. How has this gotten so out of control? Has the City has not taken into consideration the amount of
revenue it will loose on the valued property taxes of the surrounding TAX PAYORS! I am sure we will ALL
now apply for decline in value! Shame on those that decided to change the zoning on an already existing
housing community.
PLEASE RECONSIDER THE THREE STORY STRUCTURES IN THE SIGHTLINE OF THE VENEZIA
COMMUNITY.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
Bonnie Weinstein
74156 Via Pellestrina
Palm Desert, CA 92260
.8ovutt . '
1
Ceja, Eric
From: Peter Profera <twopros2@verizon.net>
Sent: Friday, April 06, 2018 10:47 AM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: Sands apts.
We write to restate our strenuous objection to these units being three stories high. Please consider the wishes of the
many neighbors to this proposed complex. Thank you. Pat & Pete Profera
0
1
Ceja, Eric
From: Gary <gfessenden@dc.rr.com>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 7:47 PM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: Portola
To whom it may concern,
As a current board member on the Portola board, a former assistant GM and Controller at Palm Desert
Marrakesh Country Club and current Director of Finance at Heritage Palms in Indio I am appalled at the greed of this
project being developed behind Portola. It was previously approved as a two story project and that has morphed into a 3
story development. Let's get it done as it was originally planned and eliminate this unnecessary issue. Being close to our
walls as well as the school presents all kinds of problems as I am sure you have previously heard. We are tax paying
citizens as well as voters and this entire mess is uncalled for because a developer got greedy. Let's do the right thing this
time.
Sincerely,
Gary R. Fessenden,
Treasurer Portola CC
Director of Finance Heritage Palms
CCAM
60 :6 WV Z 1 ddn 11112
1
Ceja, Eric
From: Diana Ritz <diana.ritz@verizon.net>
Sent: Tuesday, April 10, 2018 9:18 PM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: Proposed Sands Project vs Portola CC
My name is Diana Ritz, I am a resident at Portola Country Club. I am sending this email in protest to the
excessive and intrusive development plans submitted by New Cities Investment Partners LLC, who purchased
in 3/2017. I was extremely disappointed at your last city planning committee meeting!
It was clear the moment city attorney spoke that our voices were to be heard by deft ears. It was also clear to
me that Newell and Moran are cooperating with each other.. especially since New Cities purchased this land last
year from Canterral.. Take a look at the recorded title, this property was also a Non -Arms Length transaction
between the two as stated on the title! Also, the Environmental Impact statement commission accepted was
done by a company hired by New Cities, certainly the company they hired would be biased. As a tax payer it is
the responsibility of the city to verify the legitimacy and obtain an unbiased report.
The development they are requesting is a huge negative to the nearby residents, school, traffic load. I
understand the City of Palm Desert stands to gain financially by cooperating with HUD however this is at the
expense to the residents who pay taxes and employ the city representatives!
To allow a development with plans to build 2 and 3 story buildings is beyond incomprehensible and not even
addressing the excessive unit numbers! I encourage you to visit our property and take a good look at 1) how the
height of buildings will block the beautiful Mountain View we as homeowners PAID for, and the reason we
came to palm Desert 2) the excessive noise level this will add to what is currently a quiet neighborhood 3) the
intrusiveness to our privacy as these building heights will tower over the surrounding properties, which are
NOT COMMERCIAL but Residential!
I understand the city must seek sources to improve financial resources BUT not at the expense of
developments/residents who are long term city supporters! Certainly Portola CC is! In addition, developer must
be responsible for building a higher wall, clarify planting more mature soft scrape, insure liability to
surrounding properties for any damage caused by construction.
As a Realtor I respect this developers rights and desire to develop for profit, but this should not be at the
expense, infringement and disrespect to existing residents. I ask the city reduce the total of units and reduce the
heights of the development to protect the beauty and desirability of this city and respect the current residents!
Sent from by Diana Ritz, 74402 Zircon Cir E, Palm Desert
310-999-4380
Diana Ritz, Realtor
Century21 Union Fine Homes & Estates
Diana.Ritz@verizon.net
310.999.4380
Ca1BRE#01357566
1
Ceja, Eric
From: PATTI KEYLIN <keylins@msn.com>
Sent: Sunday, April 08, 2018 1:47 PM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: 74-351 Hovley Lane
Dear Eric,
I send this to you with utmost respect and appreciation...I find it hard to believe this wonderful city of Palm
Desert would think it in the best interest of residents and property owners to go ahead with this project, as
planned. Has the following been taken into serious consideration:
1) A THREE -story project in an area of non-existent three-story buildings.
2) Drought and water conservation in our valley.
3) Current safety hazards of traffic back-up onto Portola for elementary school drop-
off and pick-up will become even more severe.
4) Quality of life, property values and aesthetic impact for those of us who live nearby.
I implore you and those in a position to do so, to reconsider this dreaded project. Shame on you all for
considering going ahead with it as planned.
Sincerely,
Patti Keylin,
74529 Azurite Circle East
PD 92260
Sent from my iPad
r.a C)
230
-
_� orrn
N r'i
ss rn
rei ^C
10 0 rn
SD -nC�
-n
1
Ceja, Eric
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Sid Tolchinsky.<sidney@shaw.ca>
Thursday, April 05, 2018 7:44 PM
Ceja, Eric
Re: Proposed Development on Hovley Lane
RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'Sn OFFICE
,� T r .
2818 APR 12 AM 9: 09
Eric, I was very disappointed at the recent planning commission meeting. Not only with the result but to me what
appeared to be lip service paid to the many people who came to speak against the development. For example, why was
the developer allowed to defer his comments until after all opposing people in the audience spoke? Why weren't a few
people opposing the development not allowed to speak again to respond to the developer?
After hearing the developer speak, I could not help but wonder why he negotiated with Cantera I and not with Via Venezia
and Portola Country Club. Could it be because of a potential conflict of interest? That is, from the developers comments,
I understand that the land for Cantera I and the land for the new development are owned by the same entity. Also, I
understand from the developers comments that the management company for the new development will be the same as
for Cantera I. To my there is indeed a conflict of interest, if not actual, then certainly a perceived conflict. Because of
this, it certainly seems to have been in the developers best interest to have a negotiated agreement with Cantera I but no
incentive for them to do the same with the Via Venezia or Portola Country Club.
Since the developer could not be unbiased to all 3 communities, why did the planning commission not force it upon the
developer to negotiate with the other 2 communities to come up with a solution that everyone could live with? Wouldn't
that have been a much better result than having people from 2 long-standing established communities upset? Is this the
way Palm Desert plans to move forward - coming out on the side of developers and not caring about the impact on
existing communities?
I trust you will forward my comments on to city council for their upcoming review of this project.
Thank you.
Sid Tolchinsky
From: "Sid Tolchinsky" <sidney@shaw.ca>
To: "eceja" <eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org>
Sent: Tuesday, February 27, 2018 10:30:10 AM
Subject: Re: Proposed Development on Hovley Lane
Eric, thank you for your response. I did not respond further at that time because I thought the project was on hold or
canceled. 1 heard very recently that the project was still on the books to proceed.
As a home owner in Portola Country Club I remain opposed to this project.
- A new development should not be allowed to alter the aesthetics (and hence property values) of 2 long standing and
established communities of Venezia and Portola Country Club. The height of the new development will block views from
these 2 communities and will allow for unfettered peering from 3rd story apartments into the 2 existing communities.
- There will be huge impact on the already bad traffic flow in the area of Portola and Hovley East. Have you been there
around the time school is dismissed in the afternoon? I recently drove north on Portola and tried to turn right on Hovley
Lane East. There were cars blocking the right lane on Hovley all the way from the school to Portola and the outside right
turn lane from Portola was also completely blocked. Luckily I was able to use the inside right turn lane but I proceeded
extremely slowly as I was not sure whether another vehicle would veer into my lane or a child would run out. This is
already an accident waiting to happen without the additional traffic brought on from a large new development. To
someone who does not realize that people are waiting to pick up children at the school or that there are 2 right turn lanes
from Portola onto Hovley E, they will be extremely frustrated and we all know what frustrated drives can do!
Please remember that just because the Palm Desert general plan allows for and state law calls for concessions when low-
cost housing is proposed, not all projects that request the concessions are warranted.
Thank you very much for considering my concerns.
1
Sid Tolchinsky
> On Jun 16, 2017, at 1:49 PM, <eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org> <eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org> wrote:
> Hi Sid,
> Your letter will be forwarded to the Planning Commission.
> I cannot speak to why this proposal wasn't discussed at the town hall as I did not participate in it. My assumption is that
whoever did participate was not familiar with this project. The current zoning allows for 2-stories and a building height of
24-feet. However, the General Plan allows for 3-stories up to 40-feet in height. The zoning ordinance is inconsistent with
the General Plan is being amended as part of a separate process. Because the applicant is providing affordable housing
at the site, state law (AB 2222) requires the City to issue certain concessions for development and the developer has
chosen to request additional building height. Since the building height conforms to the General Plan we support the
increase in building height.
> Thanks,
> Eric Ceja
> Principal Planner
> Ph: 760.346.0611 Direct: 760.776.6384
> eceja@cityofpalmdesert.org
> Original Message
> From: Sid Tolchinsky [mailto:sidney@shaw.ca]
> Sent: Thursday, June 15, 2017 7:28 PM
> To: Ceja, Eric
> Subject: Proposed Development on Hovley Lane
> Mr Eric Ceja,
> I am an owner in Portola Country Club and I have some questions regarding the building of new apartments on Hovley
Lane between the school and existing apartments. I understand that 25 years ago, 300 two-story buildings were approved
and that now the developer wants to add 8 three-story buildings. My questions are:
> 1. Can you please explain why this issue was not raised at a town hall meeting held at Portola Country Club with senior
representatives of Palm Desert just a few short months ago?
> 2. What is the current zoning / code for properties regarding building height for this location?
> 3. Do the proposed three-story buildings exceed the current height restriction? Is approval contingent on the developer
receiving a variance from existing zoning or code?
> 4. Why would Palm Desert consider approving the three-story buildings if they exceed the height restriction?
> 5. Under what conditions / level of opposition to the proposed development would Palm Desert reject the development?
> Thank you very much for considering my questions. I look forward to your speedy response.
> Yours truly,
> Sid Tolchinsky
2
Ceja, Eric
From: David Dalton <midada1966@gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 04, 2018 5:32 PM
To: Ceja, Eric
Subject: New Construction - The Sands Apartments
Mr. Ceja,
I'm writing this email to express my opposition to the plans of the Sands Apartments. The vacant
property is going to be developed, and it should be developed.
However, the developers of that vacant piece of property should not be given the opportunity to build
higher than two stories. If special concessions were made to allow this developer to build three
stories by past council, I suggest you find a way to reverse that. Offer some other incentive. It
appears the developer managed to get the upper hand in this deal. I hold the City Council
responsible for that. The jobs of city council are to protect the constituents from aggressive
development.
Why does this little patch of Palm Desert get three stories for apartments? Why?
Why does this developer not need to provide a landscape barrier between the new and existing
properties that surround the lot.
Are not all developers held to the same standards and regulations?
I strongly encourage you to deny the three story buildings.
Kindest Regards,
David Dalton
Portola CC
Palm Desert, CA
N C)
1:1
eta
v
13
;
m
mM
g
cn
x g a -o
Z
ti m
8 W,C7
y
h]M
cn
0
a
x
1
OD1 MSS 1 DI
45' EASEMENT
po
3O'ddS N3dO
i
1
•
•yrea suiq Aoe x Z
z
m
m
z
m
z
0
0
CO —I
m O)
r s cn
G)
m
z
cn
m
ir
rq
oi
>CD
CD Z
1
ni
11-14-1 1-1 fit fit nag 1r1r1116Ur1ri�1l1il�
— i — — — — ! — — — OM = MI
Mil
1
1
a
nl
■IIIIIIIII=I
. .
HOT(LA
1
1
1
1
1
1
4 S' iN
Vba-Ect
r
_tiSyyy
4142
#Qd
lr2.
N
CO
Cr)
A»
1
1
m m m m m m m CO CO m
N N N
OVo 0, ▪ ( N N
CO CO o
0 CO
a
x
0
- CO
rg
COW A
2• 2 3
- 8 N ▪ 00
z
O
SHNIS 11)1
SHNISISAY1
Sl3SQ1Q d3LVM
❑NV T 3SVHd'XIW 11Nfl 11'0:13A°
INfOJ S3 Jfllxld DNiBWflld
O
a
1YiOl'9f15
N N
r
3
W N Ni Ni Ni
CO CO CO CO CO CO
WTTTTT
✓ • 3
%C
SL - 8 SDNIa1]n8
a
A
QD
ND PO NJ N W CO W—
a reCA NJ W N 0 01 IN[li NJ
u J N 0, CO CO
N N N
y A L L N N W W w
W W
AN r▪ Jv f.M N LJ N A 0/ N
N
1YLOl-9nS
C • S 59NIal€f1$
4, 4. W V A A co
c 22
TN N N u -. -+
N J N 0, W W m
CP ND 0 W 01 0 N
ND
• CO- WO] m ▪ N
O
a
P
j W ▪ A � C (N N SN �8 SWi+ N pp
• a A Wp co • CSv' A ▪ O OVi o 07 N � O coAQ ▪ o D
44 N
J m N 0N W W NJ W N
[h V m m t GO Q
CC m W [li N N ' 00 03. N
0
H O. 0 a
N
N N poO
N N ON N
G O a 0 C C a
• A IV CO CDL COA m (-4 f.11 W
fr- 1 W
0
O3ii3AOONn
SThOdavD
COCo
• co W N 7
a3GIAO Id ENDI 1Vd
2
1
F,
0
x
0
0
v
2
0 N W A W 4- °
0 'co "coO+ rV� W rLr��O
N Omo N 8 - Qai
d103tl ❑IL'v'tl 97Id
0
0
IV
o
CO
ti
°
I G'
HOVLEY LANE
CSD
1301A0tid 30VdS N3dO 3LVAad
LIND N3d 3S SDI
COMMON OPEN SPACE PROVIDED:
V
0
0
m
COMMON OPEN SPACE REQUIRED:
3S 0oo'!£Z
•3SfOH9fl1
z
c
m
m
N ❑
o x C
m c N
a a
0 r z
? i A
1 L] 0 m
w v m a
l£991 0173f0Nd
Stanley, Jane
From: Meredith <mlh8108@gmail.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 9:44 AM
To: CityhallMail
Cc: Lin; mlh8108@gmail.com
Subject: To the Mayor and City Council Members: On the "Sands Project"
Dear Mayor and Members of the Palm Desert City Council,
We are residents of Palm Desert and Portola Country Club, and we're writing to request your help in
safeguarding the privacy and quiet enjoyment of our neighbor families, especially those living on the
north side of our community.
With your help, our families can continue to make private use of their backyards, be free from others
peering into their windows and enjoy their home as they have until now.
Although our families do not have children, we are families nonetheless, a factor which may have
been overlooked in previous considerations of this project.
To that end, we ask for you to help in these ways by requiring the builder to:
1. limit the project to two stories, and 2. set the foundation of the project so this it is level with the
street, and 3. build a wall and plant trees tall enough on the south wall of the project to enhance the
privacy of our north border families, and maintain those trees regularly, and 4. provide detail plans of
these specifics to the City Council prior to commencing the project, also allowing the City Council
further time to consider the needs of the surrounding family communities.
Thank you in advance for your efforts on behalf of all Palm Desert families.
Sincerely,
Meredith Hardy and Linda Holland
Sent from my iPad
1
Stanley, Jane
From: Joan FitzGibbon <fitzi@nwlink.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 10:34 AM
To: CityhallMail
Subject: For the Mayor and Council regarding Case No. PP/CUP/EA 16-394 The Sands
Apartments
ry C')
Dear Mayor and City Council- �' Orno
N rn rn
ul
I am a resident of Portola Country Club.' G
? 3 story buildings do not belong on the lot on Hovely. The lot was originally de)gnatdl
for 2 story buildings as Canterra next door is and I have absolutely no problen vith P
that. 3 story buildings will be totally inappropriate at this location when all the
surrounding communities in any direction are one story for the most part and two story
and you are talking 40 ft buildings that will tower over everything. I do understand the
city has an obligation for low cost housing and we definitely need it but this site is not
the appropriate site to try to cram your obligation for that into it. Make all 306 units
low cost housing and that would be wonderful. The designation on the City Plan is a
Town Center site for the Canterra and Sands lot. In no way does the description of
these two properties fit into what the City Plan describes as a Town Center. These two
lots are wedged in between long standing neighborhoods, a school and a resort. There
are no stores, not even any street parking that you could conceive a vision of a town
center as it was rezoned to . Please consider leaving the Sands project the two story
project that was originally intended. If that cannot be done, 1 would like to see
building 11 & 8 moved to the front of the property to replace 1 & 6.
? Portola Country Club is to the south of the site and the existing wall is six feet or
under. The Canterra wall is 8+ ft and I request the developer continue the 8 ft wall so
the PCC neighbors at least can continue to have some privacy and the quiet
neighborhood they have enjoyed. While the planting buffer will be great, planting
should be done early in the project to allow the plants/trees to be at least higher than
the wall. Putting in 24" box plants will not achieve a decent height for about 4-5
years. Landscape buffer needs to be maintained by current owner or future owner and
plants replaced if removed or die so it remains as planned and approved. Canterra has
removed trees that make the 2nd story units very visible in Portola now.
? The current site has huge sand dunes from front to back and will require a lot of
earthmoving to bring the site down to the proposed grade level. All this earthmoving
may cause vibration damage to our homes and we request funds put aside or an
insurance policy available to cover such damage without us having to hire an attorney
1
to take care of issues that arise. My neighbors home had damage occur during the
Canterra construction and they experienced cracks in walls and windows.
For this meeting, I don't think this project should be approved as it was sent from the
Planning department, and request you delay the vote while the concerns and ideas of the
neighboring properties can be given the same consideration as the developer was
given. This whole project started off with little transparency to surrounding neighbors. The
initial 2 meetings of the Planning Dept were held in the summer months when population was
down. Canterra's owner and the Sands developer worked out their issues to address their
concerns just prior to Planning meetings however Portola Country Club did not have the same
opportunity with the developer and we will be living here with whatever is done now and he
will be down the road to Oakland while we live with it.
Thank you
Joan FitzGibbon
74384 Angels Camp Rd
Palm Desert, CA 92260
0 ==
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
www.avast.com
2
Stanley, Jane
From: Papillon Graphics <trish@papillongraphics.com>
Sent: Thursday, April 12, 2018 12:56 PM
To: CityhallMail; Ceja, Eric
Subject: Sands Development
Dear Council members and Planning Commission,
I have attended all the past meeting but am unable to do so tonight. I have a few comments...Your citizens are
exhausted trying to get the planning commission to at least put us on equal ground in importance as the Sands
developer. We are vehemently opposed to all the 3 story buildings that will shadow our community.
Our thoughts and common sense approach to this matter has been largely ignored by the commission. You are the last
refuge of hope we have against the damage this will cause to our neighborhood.
Please don't be part of the collective tyranny that opposes the wishes of our community.
Sincerely,
Trish Pierce
Venezia
74-122 Via Pellestrina
Trish Pierce
Papillon Graphics, Inc.
V: 760.776.8714
F: 760.779.0723
M: 760.285.1944
1