HomeMy WebLinkAboutOrd 1337 - CZ 16-280 - 77200 California Dr (88365)ORDINANCE NO. 1337
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT,
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CHANGE OF ZONE APPLICATION TO
REZONE APPROXIMATLEY 30 ACRES FORMERLY OPERATED AS THE
PALM DESERT COUNTRY CLUB EXECUTIVE COURSE LOCATED AT 77-
200 CALIFORNIA DRIVE
CASE NO: CZ 16-280
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on
the 19th day of December, 2017, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request
by Chris McFadden Architects, for approval of the above -noted and adopted Planning
Commission Resolution 2715, recommending approval for the Change of Zone and
development proposal for the former Palm Desert Country Club Executive Course, to the City
Council; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 22nd day
of March 2018, hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request by Chris McFadden
Architects, for approval of the applications for a 69-unit condominium project and above -noted
Change of Zone application; and
WHEREAS, said applications have complied with the requirements of the "City of
Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act,"
Resolution No. 2015-75, the Director of Community Development has determined that the
project will not have a negative impact on the environment and that a mitigated negative
declaration can be adopted; and
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and
arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, the City Council did find the
following facts and reasons to exist to justify the approval of said request:
1. The Change of Zone and the associated development proposal, are consistent
with the goals and policies of the Palm Desert General Plan including that: the in -
fill project is an adaptive reuse of a closed golf course that demonstrates good
design and connectivity by providing passive open space and trails and provides
a compatible density and scale to the surrounding developments, that the new
development balances open space preservation while providing high -levels of
community amenities, and the project provides additional housing variety that
ensures housing types are dispersed around the City.
2. The Change of Zone and the associated development provides land use
compatibility within the boundaries of the planning area and to adjacent properties
as the proposed units and development standards are similar to, or exceed, the
development standards of the surrounding single-family and apartment land uses
within Palm Desert Country Club.
ORDINANCE NO. 1337
3. The Change of Zone and the associated development is suitable and appropriate
for the reuse of the former golf course in that the property has been designated for
mixed -residential and that development will comply with applicable City standards.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, AS FOLLOWS:
1. That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City
Council in this case.
2. That the City Council does hereby approve Change of Zone 16-280, as shown in
Exhibit A, as proposed.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Palm
Desert, California, at its regular meeting held on the : day of _ , 2018, by the following
vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
SABBY JONATHAN, MAYOR
ATTEST:
RACHELLE D. KLASSEN, CITY CLERK
CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA
G:\Planning\Eric Ceja\Case Files\Palm Desert Country Club\CC\CC - Change of Zone Ord (3.22.18).docx
2
ORDINANCE NO. 1337
City of Palm Desert
Case No. CZ 16-280
CHANGE OF ZONE
Proposed
Zoning
Change
O.S.
To
R-2
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE NO. 1337
EXHIBIT A Dale:
G:\Planning\Eric Ceja\Case Files\Palm Desert Country Club\CC\CC - Change of Zone Ord (3.22.18).docx
3
RECEIVED
CIT Y CLERK'S OFFICE
PALM DESERT r'
2018 MAY 18 AM 10: 03
5-18-2018
To: Mayor, Sabby Jonathan
Pro-Tem, Susan Marie Weber
Council Member, Jan Harnik
Council Member, Gina Nastande
Council Member, Kathleen Kelly
From: Barbara Powers
Subject: Council Meeting Procedure
During meetings where an applicant has applied for a project, the public is allowed to speak for
3 minutes after the project is presented by the Staff . When the public hearing is closed the
applicant for the project gets to speak, say for 30 minutes. No one from the public is allowed
to refute statements that are made by that applicant. It unfair. Sometimes the
Council could benefit from what the public has to say..
For instance, in the case of the Palm Desert Country Club, request for zone change and 69 Condo
project the applicant pleaded for this project to be approved. He stated that the process had
gone though the Architectural Committee Process in May. That was not true , the voting took
place in July when most people were out of town. 1 complained because k was in Missouri for
the summer and was told there would be no more meetings until the fall when the snow birds
returned. 1 was told it was merely an administrative committee and they really had no say
except about plans. I tried all summer to obtain the minutes for that meeting. I contacted
the city and was told they were on line. Not true, I contacted Sabby Jonathan and was told
it was a technical glitch
The applicant stated that there was a community committee that worked on developing
the plans for the 69 condos.
1 sent you a letter stating what happened to this committee. Most joined
OPEN SPACE or sold their homes and moved away.
Then the applicant had one of his partners read letters that supported the project,
Only one limed in our community and did not even live on the goff course.
As to the 218 Lighting district: Applicant said there was opposition and it did not happen.
One reason, the City asked the applicant to provide his financials and make a web site.
He stated he would come back in the fall after reseeding. He never brought this back to
The city. The residents never had a chance to vote whether they would support the $25. estimated
fee.
After no action was taken, I talked to the State of California, Attorney General's tax
Department to ask about the 218 fighting District and gave them the facts. I was told,
"In the State of California there had never been a 218 Lighting District that would
benefit a private business." WE, AS A COMMUNITY WERE NEVER ABLE TO VOTE ON THIS IDEA.
In the search for the truth, people should be allowed to speak so that you have all the facts.
I urge you to change this policy for future hearings. It is not fair to everyone.
Sincerely,
Barbara Powers
76918 Kentucky Ave, .Palm Desert, CA 92211
May 21, 2018
Rachelle Klassen, City Clerk
Please distribute the attached letter and make part of the public record for City Council
Meeting May 24, 2018.
Thank You,
Jack Forney
76831 Kentucky Ave
Palm Desert, Ca. 92211
May 21, 2018
City of Palm Desert:
Sabby Jonathan, Mayor
Susan Marie Weber, Mayor Pro -Tem
Jan Harnik, Council Member
Kathleen Kelly, Council Member
Gina Nestande, Council Member
Lauri Aylaian, City Manager
Robert Hargreaves, City Attorney
Ryan Stendell, Director of Community Development
Rachelle, Klassen, City Clerk
CITY CLERICSEOFFICE
PALM DESERT r,•,
2018 MAY 21 AM I I : 15
Subject: New Amended Operation and Maintenance Agreement by and between
City of Palm Desert and PD Holdings, LLC
Our concern and solution is as follows:
Under the current Operation and Maintenance Agreement the eighteen (18) hole
golf course and the nine (9) hole executive course are collectively identified as the
"Golf Course" and all portions of the agreement apply to both courses.
The new proposed amended Operation and Maintenance Agreement will apply only
to the eighteen (18) hole golf course because of the Proposed PDCC Development of
the nine (9) hole executive course.
No one can positively state that the Proposed PDCC Development on the Executive
Course will ever actually happen, this leaves the nine (9) hole executive course in a
dire and vulnerable situation.
We are therefore asking that the PDCC Executive Golf Course, nine (9) holes be a
part of the new proposed Amended Operation and Maintenance Agreement, and all
terms of that agreement would be collectively applicable to the nine (9) hole
Executive Course, shall run with the land and bind Owner's successor's and assigns
until such time that the Proposed PDCC Development of the Executive Course is
completed on Sections A, B and C of the development or any development and at
such time that portion of the Operation and Maintenance Agreement would expire.
We further ask that the New Amended Operation and Maintenance Agreement by
and between City of Palm Desert and PD Holdings, LLC be recorded with the
Riverside County Assessor Office.
Thank your for your time and consideration regarding this matter.
Jack and Marilyn Forney
76831 Kentucky Ave.
Palm Desert, California
Reference:
City Council Meeting May 24, 2018
ORDINANCE NO. 1337 - Case No. CZ 16-280 McFadden/McFadden Architects
May 18, 2018
Palm Desert City Council
Sabby Jonathan, Mayor
73510 Fred Waring Drive
Palm Desert, Ca 92260
RECEIVED
CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
PALM DESERT C'
2018 MAY 22 AM 8: 16
Re: PDCC New agreement BEFORE they are allowed to
build 69 homes
I was at the last City Council meeting and I appreciate
everyone's questions and thinking about the details and I
did feel everyone truly does want to do the right thing for
the people but just didn't have a lot of options.
Since it does appear that the PDCC owners are going to be
allowed to build their 69 homes and the previous agreement
amended I would like to add some suggestions to be added
into their agreement before allowing them to move
forward.
THERE MUST BE SOME CONSEQUENCES if the
owners keep breaching their contracts and there is no
reason for me to believe that in time we will not be in this
same position for the 3rd time. As it was clearly brought up,
the Golfing Industry has been in a decline and that is not
expected to change, so why would anyone believe that
down the line after current owners have received their
millions of dollars in profit from the 69 units and then are
just stuck with the Championship course that of course will
not be making money (at some point) to keep them from
shutting it down with the same excuse. "we can't be forced
to stay in business at a loss"
It is not an acceptable alternative for them to ask the
owners to pay for maintenance on THEIR property while
they continue to own it after their breach of contract so here
is what I propose to be in their agreement to protect our
future before they are allowed to move forward and make a
big profit on their current breach of contract.
PDCC to put $1,000.000.00 (one million US dollars) into
an account to be held in case of breach of contract. (with
city attorney as conservator?) Money to be collected now
while we know they have the money and have the incentive
to do so.
If they breach the contract and do not keep the
Championship course open and maintain it properly then
they do not get to keep their asset and ask others to pay to
maintain it, they must sell it and should not be allowed to
make big profits on it AGAIN and here is how I propose
for that to work.
Use the million dollars to build a walkway down the middle
of the golf course and then subdivide the rest allowing
property owners on the golf course first right to buy the
portion directly abut their property and to purchase that
parcel for $1,000.00 (one thousand US dollars) If they do
not want to purchase it then their neighbors or other PDCC
homeowners may purchase it for $1,000.00. For portions
that are not abut a home, those properties/sections would be
available first for other PDCC homeowners and if they
weren't interested, then to general public with the purchase
price remaining $1,000.00 per parcel, but also keeping it
zoned open space. Having the walkway down the middle
would allow access for people that have purchased sections
that are not connected to their home, (possibly used as a
garden like there is on San Pablo, or just a meditation area
since the price makes it very affordable)
What I heard said by Mayor/Council at the meeting is that
they didn't feel they had other alternatives in the current
situation, so here is what I suggest be decided NOW while
the owners are willing to work with us because they want
their project approved, not later when they have nothing to
lose.
THE OWNERS/INVESTORS (past, current or future)
SHOULD NOT BE ABLE TO KEEP PROFITTING
FROM THEIR BREACH OF CONTRACTS!
I hope the Mayor/Council will seriously consider putting
this or something like this in their agreement for future
If?/When? They want to shut down or not maintain the
Champion Course in the future since we know that there
will come a time that financially it will not be making a
profit.
VERY IMPORTANT: Just thought of something else.
Please make sure that while doing the REZONING for the
new development that the championship course does not
end up as a separate parcel by itself and therefore eligible
down the line to be rezoned R2 open space and have 50%
of Championship Course being able to be built on because
it is not still part of the big parcel that already had 50% of it
built on.
Sincerely,
Wendy Best
43770 Virginia
Palm Desert, CA 92211
760-564-7754 Home
760-413-9611 Cell
wbesthome(a,gmail.com
Mailing Address:
P.O. BOX 62
LA QUINTA, CA
92247
KECEIYEU
CiT ALM DESER OFF ICE
2818 MAY 22 PM 3: 1 1
5-22-2018
TO: Mayor, Sabby Jonathan
Pro-Tem, Susan Marie Weber
Council Member, Jan Harnik
Council Member, Kathleen Kelly
Council Member, Gina Nastande
-FROM: Barbara Powers, Secretary OPEN SPACE ACTION COMMITTEE
SUBJECT: COUNCIL MEETING MAY 24, 2018. REGARDING ITEM B ON PAGE 10
ORDINANCE NO. 1337. CASE NO. CZ 16=280.
IF THE CITY COUNCIL 1S SERIOUS ABOUT APPROVING THE R2 ZONE, THEY SHOULD
CONSIDER POSTPONING THE VOTE ON THIS ITEM. THINK ABOUT IT,
IF YOUR APPROVE THE R2 ZONE AND DO NOT BRING THIS ISSUE BACK UNTIL JULY
TO CHANGE IT TO OPEN SPACE RESIDENETIAL, IT WILL BE LEAVING AN OPPORTUNITY
FOR THE APPLICANT TO SELL THE PROPERTY AS R2. THUS, NOT PROTECTING YOUR
188 HOMEOWNERS. IT COULD BE POSSIBLE THEY COULD SELL OR PARTNER WITH
A NEW BUILDER, SIMILAR TO WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE OWNER OF PALM DESERT
COUNTRY CLUB'S MR. CHO, LARRY KOSMONT AND H.R.HORTON. THE PROFIT TO
TO THOSE OWNERS CAME AFTER HORTON BUILT AND SOLD EACH HOUSE.
PLEASE TABLE THIS ISSUE UNTIL ALL YOUR DUCKS ARE iN A ROW.
THANK YOU,
BARBARA POWERS, SECRETARY, OPEN SPACE ACTION COMIITTEE.
Klassen, Rachelle
From: Stanley, Jane
Sent: Thursday, May 24, 2018 8:39 AM
To: Klassen, Rachelle
Subject: FW: Palm Desert Country Club
Blind copied to the City Council
Original Message
From: Ted Thomas [mailto:teded5oclocksomewhere@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wednesday, May 23, 2018 7:01 PM
To: CityhallMail <Cityhall@cityofpalmdesert.org>
Subject: Palm Desert Country Club
Im a little worried about all the changes in this area, the re -zoning of the Executive course and the banning of short term
rentals. This could possibly cause the Championship course going under and the owners going bankrupt or trying to
change the zoning on the big course to build more. The golf course and small neighborhood feel is about the only thing
that keeps this area desirable to locals and tourists. Without that this area would be a few square miles of Palm Desert
Hot Springs.
Sent from space
1