— La Quinta City Council, August 1, 2023

WRITTEN
PUBLIC

COMMENT

CITY COUNCIL

MEETING
AUGUST 1, 2023
Public Hearing
Item No. 2
Opposition:

La Quinta Village
Apartments
1 From: Nancy Alexander <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 4:08 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Nancy Alexander
Subject: WRITTEN COMMENTS - Nancy Alexander - LaQuinta - Proposed Apt Complex on 50th & Washington
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Dear Ms. Flores and LaQuinta City Council Members,
I want to share my concerns about the proposed apartment building complex on Washington & 50th.

Below are a few of my concerns:
-The size of the project doesn’t fit into the long-term goal of making LaQuinta seem quaint and friendly. The proposed project is a monstrosity. Plus, the 3-story buildings would block the views as tourists are driving south on Washington. It seems that it will look similar to the apartment building built on Jefferson just south of Hwy 111. It’ll be an eyesore. It would take away the small town feel and charm of LaQuinta.
-Currently, there are many children that walk or bike to school or attend Boys and Girls Club activities.

I’m concerned about the safety of those children not only because of traffic, but because of potential abuse towards the children. It only takes 1 bad resident to harm many children. Do you want that? -How will 500+ residents park in that small area? How will they accommodate guests? Where will they park? In our neighborhood or on the streets?
-The developer said in the last meeting that rents will start at $2000 (that has probably increased).

What low-income household can afford that type of rent? Will they need 4 or 5 people in an apartment to be able to pay their rent?
-Traffic on Washington is already high and dangerous, especially at 50MPH. There are no turn lanes.

How are tenants supposed to access the apartments?
-High density areas bring crime. You have those statistics. -There is a lot on the north side of Hwy 111 near Fred Waring that would be a better location for this project. There are no views to interrupt and there is a lot of acreage that could accommodate this size of a project.
2 I am strongly opposed to the project and hope you will vote against it.

Kind regards,
Nancy Alexander

1 From: Nkaya Brandon <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 3:39 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Fwd: VOTE NOOOOOOO on Washington and 50th project!!!!! [Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected].

Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
> July 31,2023
>
> Dear La Quinta City Council,
> Unfortunately, I will not be able to make it to your meeting on Aug 1st as I have Covid currently. > ( First time…)
>
> However, I have been at all the planning commission meetings in person and have seen and heard about the revisions the developer came up with, so strongly feel compelled to write you an email today.
>
> My husband and I live nearby 50th and Washington and drive that area daily. >
> We URGE YOU IN THE STRONGEST WAY POSSIBLE to NOT allow that project to go forward. > PLEASE VOTE NO!!!!
>
> There are SO many reasons that I have already given and written in to the Planning Commission (as has most of the community) why this project, even with the revisions, is NOT a match for that small and VERY busy corner!!!
> I am sure that you are well aware of them too.
>
> The couple that I do want to bring up in this email come from the last planning meeting about the revision by the developer:
>
> 1)In our HOT desert climate, living many months in the 90’s let alone the 100-120 degree heat - The developer is NOT putting in any ELEVATORS for the 2nd, let alone 3rd story apartments. >
> These buildings are not built realistically for the day to day health of people who live here in this climate!
> It might work closer to the beach towns, but it does not work here. >
> In reality, who will/can climb up and down 3 flights of stairs with daily groceries, purchases, etc., day in and day out?
> If young, people with children would be hauling their kids, strollers, diaper bags, etc, let alone groceries up 3 flights of stairs in most of the year’s heat just to go in and out of their apartment. 2 > If older people look to move in, how would their health be in our desert heat most of the year climbing 2- 3 flights of stairs every time they go out? > My husband and I are 65 and 72 and very healthy and we wouldn’t be able to do that in reality. >
> How would Emergency services safely get up and down in our super hot climate without any elevator access?
> This was brought up in the last planning meeting and there were a lot of heads shaking including the commissioners.
>
> It’s just not realistic, practical nor healthy for anyone to be climbing 3 flights of stairs daily in the extreme heat of our desert climate, especially anywhere from May- Nov, let alone into the summer 110-120 temps.
>
> How can you allow buildings of that height, in this desert climate to house people with NO elevators???
>
> 2) On the diagrams and what was discussed at the planning meetings, there were NO 2nd stairwells in the buildings.
> What happens in a fire?
> Or disaster?
>
> Isn’t there supposed to be a second egress for apartments on a 2nd, let alone 3rd story building? > How can that be up to code???
>
> 3) Please review the traffic study, in particular the newer one(s). > When they showed it on the screen at the last Planning Commission > meeting, I believe it showed it was done at 1A.M.( in the middle of the night!) That was not noted at the meeting and of course would explain why the project 'wouldn’t have much effect on La Quinta traffic’.
>
> 4) I believe the project only has a couple (I think it was 7 total) of parking spaces for guests for the 252 apartments!
> What happens when more than 7 apartments have one car of guests over? > Let alone more than 1 car of guests ?
>
> What happens when teenagers have a school friend over? Or a few who have their own cars? > What happens when more than 7 out of 252 apartments (with at least one occupant…) have a guest over?
> Day to day life - there isn’t any realistic room for the tenants to have any guests over - ever. > There is NO street parking on Washington nor 50th, nor is there to be any stopping and letting off of guests and kids on either very busy street.
> Very unsafe!!!
> The overflow from guest parking would be all over the neighboring developments which is definitely not good.
> Even if the neighboring developments did get ‘do not park here’ signs up soon as the building were complete, as was brought up, it would cause a lot of disturbance. > And if the street signs worked there, there is no other area close by anywhere for guests to realistically park to visit the tenants of these buildings. 3 > 5) The apartment homes in this plan are right next to the school playing field which has a multitude of massive stadium lights that are on during all the school practices and games until quite late. > These lights are extremely bright and tall and light up the area as if it were daylight. > These would reflect right into the windows and doors of the apartments. > How is living right next to, under these lights at night, a positive thing for the health of anyone? >
> ***************************
>
> This corner is a VITAL area in our stunningly beautiful city. > This view corridor acts as a 'gatekeeper area' that enchants and leads us into Old Town La Quinta. >
> It should be considered VERY seriously as to not only the safety of people traveling through the area with the inevitability of a multitude of U-turns to get into this proposed development, but also to the impact visually 'as one of the front doors’ into Old Town and the Cove areas. >
> The 2 and 3 story buildings heights are WAY too high for our area on a view corridor and next to one story developments.
>
> It doesn’t matter that the 3 story buildings are now placed more on the middle of the property, the height and the look that they developer has come up with would be a horrendous blight on our amazing landscape of mountains.
> It would block them on one of the most travelled arteries of our city. > We travel this almost daily and live very close by.
>
> IF the City MUST build something like this, PLEASE consider putting in more in the areas NORTH of 48th or North of 111 where there are more residential and commercial buildings that are similar ’shapes’ and there is much more space to fit in a project like this. A place where the needs of the residences will be better taken into consideration - guest parking, space in design for elevators etc. >
> From Washington and 48th South - there are much more low rise residential developments that are well landscaped and congruent to La Quinta (whether Spanish Colonial or Modern in design). >
> Again, this is a Keystone property in La Quinta and is deserving of something that draws you in to La Quinta and makes you feel so glad you live here.
>
> Not something that detracts from the beauty we have here and is so evident that it doesn’t belong that it affects the property values of surrounding existing developments, deflates the citizens viewpoints of what our artistic City is about, and endangers their daily safety when driving to and from their homes.
>
> There will be a project that will work for that area. > PLEASE VOTE NO on this one!!!!!!!
>
> PLEASE hold out for one that will make you proud of your legacy having worked on behalf of our wonderful City of La Quinta.
>
> Thank you.
>
> Best to all,
> Carolyn Brandon & Charles Ciup
> 50240 Woodmere
4 > La Quinta,
> Ca 92253
> The Estancias
> [email protected]
>
1 From: OP Gary Bullers <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 4:06 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: project 50th and Washington
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** As a 26 year resident at Parc Laquinta I want to express my resentment to the city that we are seriously considering a project of this magnitude on this corner. This will have serious deterioraƟon in our emergency response rates from our city. This project is far to dense for this locaƟon. Please reconsider.

Emergency response, and increased traffic, not to menƟon the strain on the current electric grid are all reason enough not to move forward with this project.

But then you look at that plans… you see the lack of parking.. and it is clear to see the spill over will result in guest parking coming all the way up to the gates at Parc La Quinta. This is a bad plan and needs to be stopped please.

Thank you for consideraƟon
Gary Bullers
78735 Maracas ct
La Quinta, CA 92253
Parc La Quinta Resident 26 years
Cell 760‐409‐4046
[email protected]
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 1 From: Alena Callimanis <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 3:29 AM
To: Linda Evans; John Pena; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Steve Sanchez; Deborah McGarrey Cc: Monika Radeva; City Clerk Mail
Subject: Comments regarding La Quinta Village Apartments Good day Mayor Evans, Mayor Pro Team Sanchez, Council Members and Staff. I am sorry I am out of town and unable to join your City Council meeting in person. I wanted to provide some comments about the La Quinta Village Apartments.

There is no question we need more rental apartments in La Quinta. But because of the proposed density, I believe there are a number of key concerns that are not addressed with the current proposal.
1) The u-turns proposed on such a high traffic corridor will cause significantly more traffic and safety issues. If I look at the many streets where there are right turn only exits out of a development followed by a u-turn to go in the opposite direction, these areas are not by a high traffic corridor like Washington and 50th. For example, there are a number of these on Madison. There are some on

52. But the traffic in those areas are not of the same volume, so it is easy to execute these maneuvers. The turns may be out of shopping centers where there are wide, three lanes and one or two turning lanes to execute a u turn. They are also not next to schools and a Boys and Girls Club which generates more pedestrian and bicycle traffic as well as car traffic. 2) There is no way you can allocate only one parking spot for a one bedroom apartment. Yes it might be code, but we are not in a major metropolitan area where you could get away with one car. Two people sharing a one bedroom apartment must have two parking spots. How do they even expect to be able to rent a one bedroom without having two spots. It would be a show stopper for most couples. And there is NO available street parking. Parents have already been told that when they come to the schools they cannot park on 50th.
3) Maybe when code was developed that you only need an elevator for a four story building, the people developing the rule did not live in the desert. I cannot imagine people climbing two or three stories to get to their apartments (carrying groceries, children, etc.) in the heat of our summers.

There is code and then there is reality.
4) The staff has said there has been no pedestrian or bicycle count in the area. School starts up in a few weeks. Can we continue the meeting where we can get a real number of cars, pedestrians and bicyclists so we can make true decisions on safety?
5) I still feel three stories is too high for this area. The developer’s video shows the proposed development with no simulation to include the fact that there are houses and schools right there. It makes me want to put a sign on Jefferson and 111 that says this apartment development is in Indio and not La Quinta!
Thanks for your consideration of my issues. I know it will be a long, difficult meeting and thank you for your dedication to our wonderful City.
2 Alena
Alena Callimanis
81469 Rustic Canyon Dr.

La Quinta, CA 92253
919 606-6164
1 From: Angela H M Carlson <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2023 4:00 PM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Written Comments: Angela and Tim Carlson, 78775 Grand Traverse Ave, La Quinta Fairways, RE: La Quinta Village Apartments
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** We moved from the Chicago area to La Quinta Fairways in March, 2020, and now live in La Quinta year round.

We would like to comment on the proposed development at Avenue 50 & Washington.

To begin, our largest and most pressing concern is the traffic congestion caused by the ingress/egress from the development itself. Perhaps in another area it would be a benefit to a right turn only into, and out of the development. However, this is a highly traveled area with a 50 MPH speed limit. The cars turning into traffic north on Washington from the development will take at least several seconds to get up to speed and those already at speed will have to change lanes or suddenly slow down to try to avoid the slower vehicles. Add to that dangerous situation illegal U‐turns (southbound to northbound) on Washington and You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important Ave 50, the additional of a new bike lane as well as pedestrians crossing and this will result in many traffic problems and future accidents.

Second, following the above concerns is the additional drop off and pick up traffic caused by the children at the two schools as well as the Boys and Girls Club at Avenue 50 and Park.  If children are our future, how do you plan on protecting them during the snow bird and festival season from the additional at least 1500 trips per day?
Third, with only right turn access out of the development, how do you propose the residents to get to Ralph’s and CVS at Jefferson and Avenue 50?  While we would all like to believe that they will follow the law and drive to Ave 48 in order to make a right turn to make their way to Jefferson, it is a fool’s folly to believe that is actually going to happen. There will illegal left turn made onto Avenue 50 in order to save time.  This is yet another thing the Sheriff’s office will have to handle.
2 Speaking of The Sheriff’s Office and Law Enforcement in this area, we have not heard their opinions on and recommendations for this development. Also, what about Fire and EMS?  What about the school district? Is there enough capacity in the current staffing/equipment environment to handle these new residents and vehicles while maintaining at least the existing service to current residents?
At the last Planning Commission meeting the architect stated that the residents and on site employees would be self policing to ensure the parking would be for just residents and visiting guests. However, there were no more that 15 guest spots for a development of 252 apartments.  Where are those guests to park when the existing spots are taken? They will likely park in the established neighborhood north of the development or along a street nearby.  We believe this to be not only unsafe with regards to traffic, but also safety of the current residents nearby.

Lastly, LaQuinta is know for its beautiful 360 degree views. Mountain and beautiful sky everywhere. The City and City Council have protected those views and skies since its inception. No where in LaQuinta is there a three story building. Why now? Why here? We know that the lots on Avenue 50 and Washington will be developed. This is NOT the development for that corner. Is there nothing that can remain no more that two stories to preserve the integrity of our city?
We decided to move to the Coachella Valley after numerous visits and stays in the area. We especially loved LaQuinta. With its wide roads, beautiful views and easy access to everything in the valley we truly believe it is the Gem of the Desert. Approval of this development will begin the process of chipping away at that Gem and turning it into another run of the mill city. We don’t want that and don’t believe the City Council does either. Please follow the opinion and vote of the Planning Commission and vote NO on this development.

Respectfully,
Angela & Tim Carlson
1 From: Duna La Quinta Board of Directors <[email protected]> Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2023 12:28 PM
To: Linda Evans; Steve Sanchez; John Pena; Kathleen Fitzpatrick; Deborah McGarrey; City Clerk Mail Cc: Cheri Flores; Tania Flores; Steven Gardner; d cox; David Schuknecht; PAT & JANICE MC COY, TRUSTEES; THOMAS GUNN & RUTHIE MARLENEE; Lawrence Van Pelt; Ron Beeler Subject: Re: Written Comments by Duna La Quinta HOA Regarding the La Quinta Village Revised Site Plan Submittal
Attachments: Letter to City Council RE La Quinta Village 7.30.pdf ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Mayor Evans and members of the La Quinta City Council, Please find the attached letter from the Duna La Quinta Homeowners Association regarding the proposed La Quinta Village Apartments, which is the subject of this coming Tuesday's Public Hearing.

Keith Meyer
President
On Tue, Jun 27, 2023 at 9:45 AM Ron Beeler <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Ms Flores and members of the City Council of La Quinta We understand the complexities of balancing the needs of developers and the community and appreciate your efforts to ensure that the interest of both parties is considered. However, we feel that the Village Apartment project will have a negative impact on our community, particularly with regards to traffic congestion and the lack of infrastructure. We hope that you will take our concerns into consideration as you continue to make decisions that affect the future of La Quinta.

I have attached a letter from Keith G Meyer, President of the Duna La Quinta, Duna 1 HOA and a letter from Duna Gardens HOA in my name.

Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 2 Thank you for your service to our community.

From: Duna La Quinta Board of Directors <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, June 26, 2023 10:45 AM
To: [email protected]; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Steven Gardner <[email protected]>; d cox <[email protected]>; David Schuknecht <[email protected]>; PAT & JANICE MC COY, TRUSTEES <[email protected]>; THOMAS GUNN & RUTHIE MARLENEE <[email protected]>; Lawrence Van Pelt <[email protected]>; Ron Beeler <[email protected]>
Subject: Written Comments by Duna La Quinta HOA Regarding the La Quinta Village Revised Site Plan Submittal

Dear Ms. Flores and Members of the City Council, please find our comments on the subject document attached.

Many thanks for your hard work making La Quinta an amazing place to live! Keith Meyer
President
DUNA LA QUINTA HOA NO. 1 BOARD OF DIRECTORS

Page 1 of 5 ends

DUNA Homeowners Association No. 1 [email protected]
July 30, 2023
Hon. Linda Evans and Members of the La Quinta City Council 78-495 Calle Tampico, La Quinta, CA 92253
RE: Review of La Quinta Village (formerly Troutdale Village) Site Plan General Plan Amendment to revise the City’s Housing Element Specific Plan Amendment to amend the existing La Paloma Specific Plan Site Development Permit
APN 646-070-016
Dear Mayor Evans and Members of the City Council;
I am the President of Board of Directors for Duna La Quinta HOA No. 1, which is located on the south side of Avenue 50 between Washington Street and Eisenhower Blvd. Duna La Quinta is a medium-high density development and includes three HOAs, totaling 184 single family and condominium units.

The Duna La Quinta Homeowners Association is greatly opposed to the La Quinta Village Apartment project as designed, due to project’s location, poor site access from Washington Street and Avenue 50, turning traffic and safety impacts, the proposed increase in allowable building height from 22 ft. to 40 ft., and the significant impact to the views along Avenue 50.

We urge the La Quinta City Council to reject the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration, Site Development Permit, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan for the La Quinta Village.

Our association has reviewed the environmental document, supporting reports and revised site plan for the proposed project and has the following comments on the developer’s proposal:

1. ACCESS
This site is not a good location for such a large housing project that generates 1,600 trips per day and the access points are too close to the Washington/50th intersection. How does a resident get into this development coming from the north? They can’t make a left turn into the development from Washington and they can’t make a left turn in from westbound Avenue 50. So, it means that 100% of traffic coming from southbound would need to make a U-turn at Avenue 50, however, this is not possible since U-turns are prohibited in the southbound direction. This lack of adequate access will create great driver frustration and encourage unsafe movements.

The Traffic Report estimates that 60% of the traffic would go to/come from Washington Street north. Since no access is available to southbound Washington traffic, all this traffic (50 vph in the PM) would need to divert to either Eisenhower Blvd. or to Jefferson Street.

Page 2 of 5 ends

DUNA Homeowners Association No. 1 [email protected]
This unavailability of access from the north invalidates one of the main assumptions of the traffic report, thus rendering the traffic report and environmental document inaccurate. It should also be noted that the traffic report does not consider pedestrian safety or signal activations at any study intersection.

2. BUILDING HEIGHT
Avenue 50 is a city-designated “Image Corridor”, with a maximum allowable height of 22’-0” (LQMC 9.50.020). The developer proposes to increase the allowable height to 28’- 0” within the Image Corridor width, and up to 40’-0” outside the corridor in order to accommodate four 3-story buildings. Changing the La Quinta Municipal Code to increase building height from 22 ft to 40 ft. is unacceptable in this corridor and location.

We disagree with the Environmental Document’s finding of No Significant Impact to Visual Resources. We implore the City to NOT ALLOW a change in building height.

3. ARCHITECTURE
The urban industrial architectural style proposed below is grossly out of place in this area of La Quinta.

Page 3 of 5 ends

DUNA Homeowners Association No. 1 [email protected]
The proposed development is surrounded by single family, single story homes with mostly tile roofs, as seen below:

It is imperative that any development in this Image Corridor be consistent with surrounding resort-style neighborhoods. Some of the style themes prevalent around the La Quinta “Village” area are shown below:

4. VIOLATION OF GENERAL PLAN POLICES
The proposed development adds nothing to this La Quinta Resort area neighborhoods, except additional traffic and significant visual impacts. Indeed, it would detract greatly from the desirability of living in La Quinta and would be a change in the character of the area forever. We believe the proposed La Quinta Village Apartments also violate the following General Plan policies:

Project

Page 4 of 5 ends

DUNA Homeowners Association No. 1 [email protected]
• GOAL LU-2. High quality design that complements and enhances the City. o Policy LU-2.1
Changes and variations from the Zoning Ordinance in a Specific Plan will be offset by high quality design, amenities and mix of land uses. • GOAL LU-3. Safe and identifiable neighborhoods that provide a sense of place. o Policy LU-3.1
Encourage the preservation of neighborhood character and assure a consistent and compatible land use pattern.
o Policy LU-3.3
Maintain residential development standards including setbacks, height, pad elevations and other design and performance standards that assure a high quality of development in the Zoning Ordinance.
• GOAL LU-4. Maintenance and protection of existing neighborhoods. o Policy LU-4.1
Encourage compatible development adjacent to existing neighborhoods and infrastructure.

5. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
In addition to the traffic and general plan issues noted above, we note that the Environmental Assessment is no longer valid, as it is out of date with the project description and supporting studies being changed. We don’t believe the City Council should approve the General Plan Amendment to revise the City’s Housing Element, Specific Plan Amendment to amend the existing La Paloma Specific Plan, nor the Site Development Permit without an approved Environmental Document.

DEVELOPMENT SUGGESTIONS
Any development in this location should consider the following design features:

A. No three-story buildings. These are unacceptable in the resort zone. Be fully compliant with the City’s existing height limitations.

B. Move any entry point from Washington Street to the furthest point north possible, break the Washington Street median and provide a deceleration lane and left-turn-in pocket so southbound traffic doesn’t need to use the Avenue 50 intersection. (this has been done in other locations on Washington Street)
C. Maintain Spanish style architecture with tile roofs and stucco finish to better match area style.

D. Eliminate any garages on the north property boundary, replace with solar-panel-covered parking and EV charging stations (similar to La Quinta City Hall).

E. Plant large Ficus or Italian Cypress trees along the north border residential properties for visual screening.

Page 5 of 5 ends

DUNA Homeowners Association No. 1 [email protected]

CLOSING
We urge the City of La Quinta to reject this project in its current configuration, and NOT APPROVE the Environmental Document, Site Development Permit, General Plan Amendment, and Specific Plan Amendment for the La Quinta Village apartments.

Thank you for the opportunity to provide comments.

Sincerely
Keith G. Meyer, PE
President, Duna La Quinta HOA No.1
78130 Calle Norte, La Quinta CA 92253
cc: Planning Dept., Duna La Quinta HOA Board of Directors, Villa Vista HOA, Duna Gardens HOA 1 Oscar Mojica
From: Brandon Faulk <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 3:12 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Opposed to a new apartment complex
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** I am a community member in the La Quinta Cove and I oppose the building of a multi story apartment complex for the following reasons:

1. It will block views of the mountains

2. It will increase traffic on Washington Street

3. It will add more noise to the cove

4. It will disrupt the beauty of the La Quinta Cove
Brandon Faulk
52085 Avenida Herrera
La Quinta, CA 92253
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important

1 From: Joan Foster <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 11:15 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Development at 50 & Washington
[Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ] ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Dear council,
I am strongly opposed to the development planned for the corner of Washington and Ave 50. As a long time resident of La Quinta, I feel this is not the appropriate corner for this density or type of housing. The traffic impact would be substantial. Years ago the council made a decision to only have ONE road as an exit to the cove and lower communities. If there is a disaster where people must leave, it would be impossible to leave quickly and with another 400+ cars using Washington St, it would create more issues. This development is a huge mistake AGAIN.

Joan Foster
78-234 Hacienda La Quinta Dr
Sent from my iPhone

1 From: Joe Hager <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 5:22 PM
To: Tania Flores; City Clerk Mail
Subject: Proposed apartment complex, LaQunita Village
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** The Honorable Linda Evans, Mayor
The Honorable Steve Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem
The Honorable Kathleen Fitzpatrick
The Honorable Deborah McGarrey
The Honorable John Pena
Dear La Quinta Council Members,
I am writing to you to express my concerns regarding the apartment complex project proposed at 50th and Washington called La Quinta Village Apartments and our opposition to the project.

My name is Joe Hager.

My wife and I own a house in Duna La Quinta, which is directly across the intersection for the proposed high density development.

We strongly oppose this development for the following reasons:

1. A proven fact: the higher the population density, the higher the crime rate; the higher the single-family land use, the lower the crime rate; and the higher the percentage of multifamily land-use, and the higher the crime rate, including higher rates of robbery, aggravated assault and rape. * From the study, titled "Land Use and Violent Crime," published in the November 2009 issue of the journal Criminology.

There are currently numerous school children that walk through that intersection on their way to and from school. They will be at a much higher risk of kidnapping, assaults and rape due to this development.  Those children will also have increased risks of serious injury or worse from the increased traffic at that intersection and the entrances/exits of this proposed development.
 There is also a proven relationship between home ownership and crime. This is true of both violent and property crime. The bottom 25 states in homeownership have violent crime rates that are 17.43 percent higher than in the top 25 states for homeownership. Property crime rates in low homeownership states are 6.31 percent higher than in high homeownership states

2. Higher density areas repel single-family homeowners. Homeowners prefer to be next to single-family homes rather than apartments. Thus, this development, at this location, will 2 decrease the attractiveness of our adjacent single-family neighborhoods, and potentially decrease our property values.
 higher crime rates drive down demand, which causes prices to fall in response

3. Increased density decreases neighborhood personal interactions, involvement and changes behaviors.

One of the main reasons we were attracted to this area of Palm Springs was Old Town LaQuinta: it has the intimacy of the small town with its surrounding neighborhoods.

As we go for morning walks or walk to dinner in Old Town, we meet numerous other similar, friendly homeowners, which fosters connections. More homeowners in a neighborhood results in more civic engagement and personal investment
The proposed development, at this location, will negatively affect the friendliness and social interactions of our neighborhoods, including Old Town LaQuinta.
 This will be the result of the increased transience and turnover of residents from the high density development, at that location.

4. A high density development with multi-storied apartment buildings would be out of place and not fit in with the adjacent neighborhoods, even with the latest proposed architectural modifications.
 This location is surrounded by small neighborhoods of single-family houses and should remain that way.
 This intersection and Washington Ave is one of the main entrance points to our quaint Old Town LaQuinta, thus changing the Old Town feeling and historical ambience of our city.

I strongly recommend that a different location is selected for this type of high density development to prevent the occurence of the above facts and issues.

We do NOT support this development proposal nor the proposed amendments to the general plan, variances to the zoning nor the site development plan as proposed. 1) Please, do not approve the waiver to the current zoning. 2) Please, do not amend the general plan. This process was completed with analysis and community input.
3) Please, do not permit this project.

VOTE NO
Sincerely,
Joe Hager
1 From: Linda Evans
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2023 6:54 AM
To: Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva
Subject: Fwd: 50th and Washington
Attachments: troutdale.docx
Opposed
Linda Evans
Mayor
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
Cell: 760.899.3279
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
From: Carol Herrick <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 1:54:19 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>
Subject: 50th and Washington
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important July 26, 2023
Re: Proposed Site of the La Quinta Village Apartments
I am writing to plead with the City Council to consider the concerns of their constituents.

The name alone, of the proposed site, should raise a red flag. Does their rendering really reflect La Quinta? Does it reflect the “old town” feel? Does it take into consideration the surrounding neighborhood? I think if you really look at it, the answer is NO to all of the questions.

When there was the proposal for the Senior rehab center, there was little to no opposition. It did not impair the views, it did not affect the traffic, it did not change the architecture of the La Quinta neighborhood, and they were going to bury the power polls that are on the north part of the property.

We have seen the changes that The Irwin Group are going to make from the original plans. Lowering 7 of the 3 story buildings down to 3 ½. That is not enough. The change should be to make them all 2 story buildings. Spread the complex out more. Once you approve any 3 story buildings, you set a precedent for more to come. Do we really want that? Do they really need a pickle ball court? The city already has a very nice facility for that. I feel that they can rearrange their plot plan and accommodate our wishes.

Traffic is a major concern regardless of the studies that have been performed. The schools and the boys and girls club were not informed of this proposed construction.

Don’t you think that this would be a concern for them? Traffic will be heavier during the school year, children walking to school and having to circumvent the cars going in and out of the property. U turns being made at the intersection of the school property.

The Irwin Group shows that they have 107 ADA apartments, but do you realize they only have 10 ADA assigned parking spaces? They say that this is affordable housing. Normal 1 bedroom apartments in La Quinta are renting from between $1800 t0 $2200 per month, therefore in order to be considered affordable housing, should these not rent for less. These new units, priced at $1900 for a 1 bedroom 600+sq ft apartment would only be affordable if you have 3 working tenants in 1 bedroom. The 2 bedroom even worse. You would need , 3‐5 working tenants.

I realize that we need affordable, low income housing. Plainly this is not it. They have pointed out that the corner of Fred Waring and Washington would be the site for this Low Income Housing, where is the owner of that property. Is it fair and just to pawn off the problem to them?
Finally, I would like to address trust. We had a building on Washington that was going to be a museum, what happened? The Silver Rock area that is set to be developed, what is happening with that? Will this be another eyesore that doesn’t finish? Can we trust this company to finish what they start? If due diligence is really performed can you say that this will carry through in the manner that is expected and that this company is trustworthy?
I implore you to listen to the People of La Quinta.

Thank you for your time,
Michael and Carol Herrick
78580 Saguaro Rd
La Quinta, Ca 92235

1 From: Cheri Flores
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 10:48 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Tania Flores; Danny Castro
Subject: FW: APN 646-070-016 Irwin partners Application NW Corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 Hello Clerks,
Forwarding comments for La Quinta Village Apt. I have not responded.

Cheri Flores | Planning Manager
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760-777-7067
www.laquintaca.gov
From: Todd Hopkins <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 10:44 AM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: APN 646‐070‐016 Irwin partners Application NW Corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Good morning Ms. Flores,
My name is Todd Hopkins. My fiancee Gina Calhoun and I are homeowners in La Quinta Country Club (Montero Estates subdivision). As you are likely aware, our home is within a couple hundred yards of the proposed development.

We are opposed to the proposed plan amendment, specific plan and site development permit for the proposed project at the Northeast corner of Washington Street and Avenue 50 in la Quinta.

The plans density will bring additional traffic and noise and light pollution to the corner of Washington and Avenue 50 as well as the surrounding community.

The traffic and noise from that area is already quite heavy at times.

We have also experienced multiple security breaches and crime events in our area.

The proposed project will bring additional traffic to the area including old town la quinta, roadways, golfcart access lanes and limited pedestrian throughways. The density of the area already tests the existing infrastructure.

It is our position that we are adamantly opposed to the proposed development as planned for this parcel. I believe our neighbors are of the same mindset for the concerns outlined here. We thank you for your consideration and appreciate it, as we love this community and are proud to be part of it. Respectfully. Todd Hopkins and Gina Calhoun You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 1 From: Linda Evans
Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2023 6:53 AM
To: Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva
Subject: Fwd: No to La Quinta Village Apartments
Oppose
Linda Evans
Mayor
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
Cell: 760.899.3279
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
From: PetFlysRocks <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 2:11:18 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>
Subject: No to La Quinta Village Apartments
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** July 26, 2023
Re: Proposed Site of the La Quinta Village Apartments
I am writing to plead with the City Council to consider the concerns of their constituents.

The name alone, of the proposed site, should raise a red flag. Does their rendering really reflect La Quinta?
Does it reflect the “old town” feel? Does it take into consideration the surrounding neighborhood? I think if
you really look at it, the answer is NO to all of the questions.

When there was the proposal for the Senior rehab center, there was little to no opposition. It did not impair
the views, it did not affect the traffic, it did not change the architecture of the La Quinta neighborhood, and
they were going to bury the power polls that are on the north part of the property.

Spread the complex out more. Once you approve any 3 story buildings, you set a precedent for more to You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 2 come. Do we really want that? Do they really need a pickle ball court? The city already has a very nice facility
for that. I feel that they can rearrange their plot plan and accommodate our wishes.

Traffic is a major concern regardless of the studies that have been performed. The schools and the boys and
girls club were not informed of this proposed construction. Don’t you think that this would be a concern for
them? Traffic will be heavier during the school year, children walking to school and having to circumvent the
cars going in and out of the property. U turns being made at the intersection of the school property.

The Irwin Group shows that they have 107 ADA apartments, but do you realize they only have 10 ADA assigned parking spaces? They say that this is affordable housing. Normal 1 bedroom apartments in La Quinta
are renting from between $1800 t0 $2200 per month, therefore in order to be considered affordable housing,
should these not rent for less. These new units, priced at $1900 for a 1 bedroom 600+sq ft apartment would
only be affordable if you have 3 working tenants in 1 bedroom. The 2 bedroom even worse. You would need ,
3-5 working tenants.

I realize that we need affordable, low income housing. Plainly this is not it. They have pointed out that the
corner of Fred Waring and Washington would be the site for this Low Income Housing, where is the owner of
that property. Is it fair and just to pawn off the problem to them? Finally, I would like to address trust. We had a building on Washington that was going to be a museum, what
happened? The Silver Rock area that is set to be developed, what is happening with that? Will this be another
eyesore that doesn’t finish? Can we trust this company to finish what they start? If due diligence is really
performed can you say that this will carry through in the manner that is expected and that this company is
trustworthy?
I implore you to listen to the People of La Quinta.

Thank you for your time,
Tammy & Jerry Howard
78775 Sagebrush Ave
La Quinta, Ca 92235
1 From: joejagent <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 4:26 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: FW: 50th and Washington
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐‐
From: joejagent <[email protected]>
Date: 7/31/23 4:20 PM (GMT‐08:00)
To: [email protected]
Subject: 50th and Washington
If you saw the destruction by the winds early this morning, you would know another reason to oppose 3 story buildings at that location.

The area to the north gets strong winds from the south or southeast a few times a year. Tall buildings will work like when you put your thumb on a hose to get the stream to go faster and harder. This puts residents at greater risk of injury and property damage.

Please note, as proposed the houses bordering the wall will lose value. This depreciation will ripple its way to all surrounding neighborhoods and then to others in the City. This will lead to loss of property tax revenue slowly but surely.

No to three story buildings. No to inadequate parking for tenants. No for requiring permits to park in front of your own house. No to buildings constructed north/south. No to buildings with more than one floor with elevators and multi stair cases so disabled are not confind to one floor and emergency personnel can get people out in case of emergency.

Thank you for your consideration,
Joe Johnson
Saguaro Rd
La Quinta
Sent from my Verizon, Samsung Galaxy smartphone
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 1 From: Tania Flores
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 12:36 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Danny Castro; Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: 50th & Washington Housing Project
Please see public comment below regarding La Quinta Village Apartments. I have not sent a response.

Thank you.

I would like to highlight on the record my DISAPPROVAL for the project moving forward.

The scale and number of units is NOT consistent with the area. While I understand the need to create lower income housing this location doesn't seem ideal - surely there are other parts of the city where housing could be placed that would not create traffic issues and disrupt the consistency for the type of homes around it (single story units)
Thanks
Thomas Kenny
1 From: Charlotte Leiss <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 10:18 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Vote No
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** The Honorable Linda Evans, Mayor
The Honorable Steve Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem
The Honorable Kathleen Fitzpatrick
The Honorable Deborah McGarrey
The Honorable John Pena
Dear La Quinta Council Members,
My name is Charlotte Leiss and my husband Rob and I have been residents of La Quinta at 49605 Avila Drive since 2022. We agree with the following remarks.

I am writing to you to express my concerns regarding the very large and dense housing project proposed at 50th and Washington called La Quinta Village Apartments and our opposition to the project.

It is not that I oppose development and I understand the state needs to build more housing, and more affordable housing.

I oppose this large and dense development as proposed because of the significant variance from the current zoning, incomplete analyses and further negative impacts, and this does not really include affordable housing.

In summary the proposal is OVERBUILT, a BAD PLAN with unacceptable CONGESTION, is UNSAFE and a BAD FIT.

While there has been a detailed impact report performed by a consultant hired by the builders, I do not believe they have incorporated observations within the community, nor actual baseline measurements including errors in the report.
1) OVERBUILT: A 252 unit proposal is significantly greater than the general plan allowances as zoned, Medium High Density, when we purchased our property.

The intended purpose per Civil Code 9.30.060 is "To provide for the development and preservation of mediumhigh density neighborhoods (eight (8) to twelve (12) units per acre" and this proposal significantly exceeds that. "Too many units in too small a space...", commissioner Dale Tyerman. 2) BAD PLAN: I am sure the Planning Commission will hear arguments by the applicant that the project can’t be built unless the Planning Commission supports the change to the General Plan and to up zone the property.

I ask that when our council members hear from the applicant the project “doesn’t pencil” without their proposed changes, what they really mean is that they won’t receive the same profit margin they desire vs modest changes that would keep the project within our zoning and general plan.

Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 2 3) CONGESTION: The number of parking spaces and the traffic impacts identified do not comport. With 520 parking spaces provided, the project would provide “homes” to almost twice as many cars as the proposed number of housing units, with the expectation that those parking spaces would be occupied and used by the tenants in the building. Thus the trip generation rates used to calculate traffic and the accompanying impacts have have been significantly underestimated. Tenants driving south on Washington will have to make a U-turn at Avenue 50 to enter the complex, which will also cause increased congestion. 4) UNSAFE: This development is located near a sports complex, two schools, and a Boys & Girls Club which together create a great deal of traffic congestion in this area. We believe there is also a safety concern adding more cars to an area where parents are parking, delivering/picking-up children, and children are walking to and from the facilities.
5) BAD FIT: The height and aesthetics match nothing in the nearby neighborhoods. They dramatically and negatively change the character of the neighborhood.

I ask the council to please hear and consider these comments from me and from your residents as you weigh the plan in total.

VOTE NO
Charlotte and Rob Leiss
49605 Avila Dr., La Quinta, CA
--
Charlotte Leiss
m +1 707-799-1526
Sent from Charlotte's iPhone

1 From: Linda Evans
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 6:49 AM
To: Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva
Subject: Fwd: Comment for the Record: Proposed Apartment Complex Avenue 50 & Washington Linda Evans
Mayor
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
Cell: 760.899.3279
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
From: Mary Montgomery <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, July 30, 2023 1:06:42 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>; Steve Sanchez <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; John Pena <[email protected]>
Cc: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Comment for the Record: Proposed Apartment Complex Avenue 50 & Washington ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Earlier I emailed two petitions with the names and addresses of 360 LaQuinta residents who oppose the apartment project at Washington & 50th. The first of these two petitions was presented to the City on July 7, the second emailed on 7/29.

What is important to understand about these petitions is that I emailed 375 LaQuinta residents; 96% (360 residents) wrote in opposition to the project. The two who were not in opposition were both developers.

One thing is clear: Residents of LaQuinta DO NOT support this project. These are your constituents. Unlike the developer, they are the people who live in LaQuinta. They cherish the community and want to preserve its peace and natural beauty as our City continues to grow. They are the people who pay taxes here and strongly support the expanding local business community.

These concerned citizens have voiced their apprehension over the inevitable increase in traffic, including the required U-turn at Avenue 50 and Moon River Drive, and have called to your attention the safety of the more than 650 children who attend Harry Truman school and after school activities at the Boys & Girls Club. They are also disquieted over the height of the 3 story units (proposed at 27% above code, it is sure to interrupt view corridors) and the density of the 252 units.

You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 2 Of course, we know that growth is inevitable. But we also know that it can and should be growth that enhances the beauty, environment and overall livability of LaQuinta -- something for which we can be proud and that extends the desirability of LaQuinta as a community in which to live, work and grow.

Thank you for your consideration and for the opportunity to present the views of the 360 residents whose names appear on the petition.

Mary Elizabeth Montgomery
49300 Avenida Fernando
La Quinta
760-989-3939
1 Monika Radeva
From: Linda Evans
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 6:10 PM
To: Jon McMillen; Monika Radeva
Subject: Fwd: Apts at 50th & Washington
Oppose
Linda Evans
Mayor
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico
La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. 760.777.7030
Cell: 760.899.3279
www.laquintaca.gov
www.playinlaquinta.com
From: Brad Nelson <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 6:06:59 PM
To: Linda Evans <[email protected]>
Subject: Apts at 50th & Washington
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Mayor Evans:

I am writing you to request that this proposed apartment project be denied as currently proposed.

I live in the Palmilla neighborhood at 50th and Jefferson so I pass the subject site almost every day.

My personal background includes an in‐depth knowledge of development ( Bachelors and Masters degrees in Urban Planning plus decades in the development industry having planned and developed residential, apartment, office, industrial and resort projects, including with clients such as Ernie Vossler.) The project is an in‐fill one which typically should be compatible with its surrounding neighborhood. I reviewed the proposed project and found it lacking suitable findings and justifications for its approval such as ‐

1. The intensity (density) of the use is not compatible with the surrounding community of low density, mostly one‐ storey residential use. The intensity creates excessive parking needs and traffic impacts.

2. There is no market demand analysis that supports this apartment use (demand by price, unit type, and absorption rate) at this location, at this time. I have repeatedly asked for a market study for the site, but none is available.

3. The architecture ‐ scale, 3 storey building heights, mixed architectural character and site planning ‐ are not compatible with the surrounding community.
2 4. The streetscape does not continue the existing character of the surrounding image streets.

5. I suggest that a small mixed use project of limited residential and office/commercial uses would be a better neighbor : all one storey buildings, different/better access and reduced parking and traffic impacts, and more landscaping on the site.

6. Also some limited residential (e.g. attached single family) and a pocket park on the corner could be a great asset to the community. Planting trees is the best means of reducing carbon in the air ( sequestration) if that is a city goal.

7. I believe the community wants compatible, integrated development on this site regardless of the affordability issues.

After the first Planning Commission meeting, I requested that the developer meet with and work with the community in a workshop to create a plan that would achieve community support. No workshop meetings were held, then the developer presented its new plan without community input a fews days before the last commission meeting, The proposed project with revisions does not meet the goals and objectives of the surrounding residents of the community, nor, I believe, the City!
Please reject the proposed development.

Respectfully,
Brad Nelson
50370 Via Puente
La Quinta, CA
Sent from my iPhone
Brad Nelson
1 From: Joe Nemeth <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 1:40 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Written Comments - Joseph Nemeth La Quinta, La Quinta Village Apartments ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** The Honorable Linda Evans, Mayor
The Honorable Steve Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem
The Honorable Kathleen Fitzpatrick
The Honorable Deborah McGarrey
The Honorable John Pena
Dear La Quinta Council Members,
My name is Joseph Nemeth and my wife Stacy and I have been residents of La Quinta at 78144 Hacienda La Quinta Dr since 2019.

I am writing to you to express my concerns regarding the very large and dense housing project proposed at 50th and Washington called La Quinta Village Apartments and our opposition to the project.

It is not that I oppose development and I understand the state needs to build more housing, and more affordable housing.

In summary the proposal is OVERBUILT, a BAD PLAN with unacceptable CONGESTION, is UNSAFE and a BAD FIT.

I ask the council to please hear and consider these comments from me and from your residents as you weigh the plan in total.

VOTE NO
Joseph and Stacy Nemeth
78144 Hacienda La Quinta Dr, La Quinta, CA
‐‐
Joe Nemeth
m +1 408‐421‐1295
1 From: Malott Nyhart <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 1:32 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Proposed housing development Ave. 50/Washington Street ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** I am a homeowner at 78013 Lago Dr. La Quinta, CA 92253.

I am writing to the LQ City Council to reject the current proposed apartment housing proposal recently rejected by the Planning commission. I believe that this corner can support a nice housing project but the proposed 200+ units will create unsafe traffic movement if approved as planned. As a daily pedestrian and bicycle rider I have elected to NEVER ride my bike on Washington St from LQ village to U.S Highway 111 due to the extremely fast vehicles which travel at almost interstate speeds. The police are obviously unable to slow the traffic and therefore any additional traffic turning onto Washington or any access on Washington will very likely create more mishaps. I have witnessed too many racing cars switching lanes above the speed limit to avoid legally driven cars to believe this area can handle more entry into this area. Surely, there is a developer who can build nice enough homes to support the area within the social constraints imposed.

Malott Nyhart
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important 1 From: Ben Olson <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 12:27 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: 'Kappy Olson ([email protected])'
Subject: Public Comment
Attachments: LQ Village Apartments Opposition Letter.docx ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** La Quinta City Clerk’s office,
Thank you for incorporating the attached public comment letter into the August 1, 2023 City Council meeting public record. The letter is regarding Item #2 under Public Hearing, La Quinta Village Apartment proposal.

Respectfully,
Ben and Kappy Olson
Some people who received this message don't often get email from ben@oe‐ca.com. Learn why this is important July 31, 2023
The Honorable Linda Evans, Mayor
The Honorable Steve Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem
The Honorable Kathleen Fitzpatrick
The Honorable Deborah McGarrey
The Honorable John Pena
Dear La Quinta City Council Members:

My name is Ben Olson, my wife is Kappy Olson, my home is located at 49575 Rancho San Francisquito in the Talante development of La Quinta. I am writing regarding Public Hearing Item #2, 252‐Unit Apartment Project, La Quinta Village Apartments, on the Tuesday, August 1, 2023, City Council agenda.

We have been residents of La Quinta since 1980. We have owned our home and lived in the Talante Community for the past 20 years.

We understand that affordable housing is needed in our community. We support genuine efforts to build affordable housing, we just don’t believe this project is being proposed in the right location and the rental prices are not affordable to the people who need them most.

We OPPOSE this project for the following reasons:

1. Traffic congestion this development will create on Washington Street and Avenue 50 will severely impact everyone in the surrounding area. We understand the traffic study for this proposal was completed during the pandemic and does not accurately calculate the current traffic congestion in this area. Tenants driving south on Washington will have to make a U‐turn at Avenue 50 to enter the complex, which will also cause increased congestion.

2. This development is located near a sports complex, two schools, and a Boys & Girls Club which together create a great deal of traffic congestion in this area. There is also a safety concern adding more cars to an area where parents are parking, delivering/picking‐up children, and children are walking to and from the facilities.

3. We believe that for people who truly need affordable housing to live in this development there is the possibility more people will live in the complex than is projected, therefore, increasing the number of cars driving in and out and parking in the development.

This project is simply too large for this parcel of land. The developer is trying to do too much with 14 acres and the density is too great for this small corner of our community. If we are really going to tackle the affordable housing issue, then we must build truly affordable housing.

Thank you for considering our comments and hope you will vote NO on this proposal.

Respectfully,
Ben and Kappy Olson
49575 Rancho San Francisquito, La Quinta
1 From: Tania Flores
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 10:25 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Danny Castro; Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: Council meeting Aug 1
Please see public comment regarding La Quinta Village Apartments below. I have not responded.

Thank you.

Tania Flores, CMC | Administrative Technician Design & Development Department City of La Quinta 78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253 Ph. (760) 777-7023 [email protected] www.LaQuintaCA.gov
-----Original Message-----
From: christine peck <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 10:12 AM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Council meeting Aug 1
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Good morning,
As an owner/resident of Duna la Quinta neighborhood, I wish to strongly state my objection to the proposed development on Washington St and 52nd Ave, La Quinta. The many reasons have been detailed by our neighborhood leaders and are too numerous to restate here.

Yours Sincerely,
Christine Peck
78042 Calle Norte, La Quinta, CA 92253
1 From: Tania Flores
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 7:50 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: For City Council 8/1 meeting: Petitions re Planned Apartments: Avenue 50 & Washington Attachments: July 6 Petition Letter.docx; Petition Letter No. 2.docx Please see public comment below and attached regarding the La Quinta Village Apartments. I have not issued a response.

Tania Flores, CMC | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760) 777-7023
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Mary Montgomery <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2023 2:31 PM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: For City Council 8/1 meeting: Petitions re Planned Apartments: Avenue 50 & Washington ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Tania,
Attached is the petition I dropped off at City Hall on July 7 showing the names and LaQuinta addresses for the 311 individuals who asked that their names be added to those IN OPPOSITION to the Apartment complex planned for Avenue 50 & Washington.

Also attached is a second petition showing an additional 49 names and LaQuinta addresses who asked that their names be added to those IN OPPOSITION to the Apartment complex planned for Avenue 50 & Washington.

Can you please add these two petitions showing the 360 names of those IN OPPOSITION into the public record comments and confirm to me these 360 names will become part of the public comments.

Many thanks for your assistance.

Mary E. Montgomery
49300 Avenida Fernando
La Quinta 92253
July 7, 2023
TO:   LaQuinta City Council Members
RE:   Proposed Project:  NE Corner of Washington & Avenue 50 We urge the City Council NOT to approve this project for the following reasons:
 At 252 units, some 3‐story (and without elevators), this proposed development is too dense for the surrounding neighborhoods.  (Without the so‐called “Density Bonus”, code for developing this property is limited to 177 units.)  With 522 parking spaces, traffic on Avenue 50 is sure to increase significantly, resulting in less safety and increased noise and light pollution, thus impairing quality of life and, in some cases, interrupting view corridors of existing residents.  The proposed height of the three‐story units is 28 feet, six feet or 27% above the 22‐ foot code.
 There are questions about whether the proposed development compromises the safety of children who attend the nearby Middle School and Boys & Girls Club, located at Moon River Drive.  Many of these children walk, roller blade or ride their bikes to/from school.  The safety situation is exacerbated by the U‐turns at Eastbound Avenue 50 and the Park/Moon River intersection that will be required to access the proposed property.  The property is owned by a company in Oregon; the developer is in Costa Mesa, both with little vested interest in preserving the quality of life that we have come to enjoy as LaQuinta residents.

We agree that development this vacant property is inevitable and can be a positive for the City.

BUT it can and should be developed in a manner that ensures safety, consistency with La Quinta’s charm and style, and serves to preserve the peace and view corridors of LaQuinta ‐‐ as other developments in or near Old Town have achieved to good effect.

Bruce & Daisy Albertson
48‐751 San Vincente
Cindy Anderson
488‐955 El Nido
Jim Armatus
49‐165 Avenida El Nido
Rebecca Backes
78‐230 San Timoteo
Al & Diana Backman
49‐125 Avenida Fernando
Phil Backman & Sharon Sledhil
49285 Avenida El Nido
James Baldwin & Kathy Moran
78823 Breckenridge Drive
Beth & George Barnes
48‐711 San Vincente
Brad Barrett
48‐750 San Lucas
Ron & Lynn Beeler
78262 Calle Las Ramblas
Susan & Larry Bianchi
79‐780 Tangelo Street
Elizabeth & Frank Billante
49‐815 Rancho San Felipe
Shawn & Laura Bitzan
48‐135 Hermosa
Jeff & Vicky Botsford
49‐380 Avenida Fernando
Kay & Bob Brehm
80‐073 Riviera
Ken & Kay Broadie
49‐035 Cedros Circle
Ted & Liz Broedlow
48‐771 San Vincente
Nancy Buford
49‐931 Coachella Drive
Sila van den Bussche
50440 Cypress Point Drive
Linda & Dave Campbell
78‐269 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
John Carnes & Shannon Devlin
49‐732 Avila Drive
Marilu & Allan Carroll
79‐120 Big Horn Trail
Deborah Carter & Jessica Ruh
49‐434 Avila Drive
Marge & Gary Chamberlain
49‐506 Avila Drive
Richard & Raelene Christie
78‐125 Lago Drive
Bill & Diane Cornell
50745 Cypress Point Drive
Judie & Richard Cothrun
49‐335 Avenida Fernando
John & Carol Cowden
49‐790 Coachella Drive
Tom & Janet Curtis
77‐935 Lago Drive
Debbie Dale
78‐007 Lago Drive
Dina & Mike Dargis
78‐179 Hacienda LaQuinta
Charlotte Davis
78186 Calle Norte
James & Diane Deckert
49‐789 Coachella Drive
Romeo & Erika Dela Rosa
48‐905 Avenida Fernando
Jerry & Joanne Dickey
77‐941 Lago Drive
Jerry Donahue
49‐488 Avila Drive
Suzanne & Joe Donnelly
49‐644 Avila Drive
Laurie & Dan Donohue
49‐847 Coachella Drive
Jo Downey & Harry Wilson
78‐020 Coronados Circle
Sue Driscoll
78911 Breckenridge Drive
Maureen Dugan
48‐770 Via Linda
Sandy Dyer
48‐800 San Isidro Street
Terry & Kevin Eastley
50640 Spyglass Hill Drive
Steve Eckinger & Marsha Soday
49‐650 Eisenhower
Patti & Jim Eddy
49‐350 Avenida Anselmo
Mary & Mark Engler
57615 Coral Mountain Court
Tina Everson
49‐680 Coachella
Dan & Tammy Fairchild
78‐285 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Mark & Lynda Farnen
78835 Grand Traverse
Corey & Heidi Farr
49‐750 Entrada Circle
Deborah Fenn
49‐783 Candaleria
Julia Fisher
49‐825 Lago Drive
Eric & Holly Fiskum
45‐385 Guijarro Drive
Rob & SeraLynn Florek
48‐700 Santa Ursula Street
Dr. Wilbert & Glenna Friesen
50720 Cypress Point Drive
Jeannie & John Fuller
47‐675 Via Montessa
Mike & Tracie Furlong
27332 Via Amistoso
Marcia Gallagher
77‐985 Lago
Roger & Jacqueline Garvin
50685 Grand Traverse Avenue
Rhonda Gerke
77370 Calle Quintana
Jamie Gluck & John Wentworth
77240 Arteaga
Renata & Jay Green
77‐285 Loma Vista
Marta & Rob Griffin
78‐270 Hacieda La Quinta Drive
Sue & John Hagestad
49‐128 Avenida Fernando
Fred & Carol Hanley
78‐065 Coronados Circle
Kathy Hatfield
47‐610 Eisenhower Drive
Garry Harris & Marcia Wolfe
78875 Grand Traverse Avenue
Steve & Erin Hernandez
49575 Avenida Montero
Greg & Jennifer Hicks
78540 Bottlebrush Drive
Carl & Sheila Highgenboten
78‐180 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Todd Hopkins & Gina Calhoun
49537 Avenida Montero
Pat Hogan & Ross Johnson
78‐017 Lago Drive
Greg & Glenna Helm
48‐700 San Dimas Street
Bob & Ann Hogeboom
78‐225 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Skeeter & Suzie Holt
49‐729 Avila Drive
Moe & Phil Hosp
78‐048 San Timoteo
Charlie & Kathy Hough
78688 Cabrillo Way
Joan Jeffrey
49‐749 Entrada Circle
Julianne Keil
78‐086 Lago Drive
Emma Kite
49‐614 Avila Drive
Jay & Sharon Kleinheinz
78‐750 Eisenhower Drive
Harry & Bonnie Kloosterman
48‐454 Via Palomino
John Kramer & Jon McBride
48‐900 El Nido Drive
Bill & Pam Lane
48‐720 Avenida Fernando
Rob Lang & Alisa Martin
49‐100 Avenida Anselmo
Mark & Patricia Langermann
78‐995 Del Monte Court
Angela Lafferty
50380 Spyglass Hill
Steve & Susie Lewis
49‐416 Avila Drive
Kathy Lester
78‐084 San Timoteo
Pete Lexus
Spyglass Hill
Maureen Liebman
48‐741 San Vincente Street
Joe and Angela Lis
78‐182 Calle Las Ramblas
Karen & Lou Lister
49‐845 Lago Drive
Paul & Susie Lyon
49‐517 Guijarro Drive
Virgil & Patty Macaluso
78‐108 Lago Drive
Keith & Gail MacLeod
49‐829 Adelito Circle
Tom & Meg Maloney
77‐305 Loma Vista Drive
Bert & Louise McCabe
49‐600 Avenida Montero
Mac & Missy McGee
49‐830 Coachella Drive
Diane McGonigle
48‐800 Santa Ursula Drive
Jan & Dave McLintock
49‐756 Avila Drive
Duncan & Becky McInnis
78‐068 San Timoteo
Bill & Pat McKamey
50300 Spyglass Hill Drive
Kevin & Liz Mechelke
49‐786 Coachella Drive
Grace & Neal Mehta
53480 Avenida Mendoza
Karen & Dave Matheson
78182 Calle Norte
Mike & Patti Mergerner
48‐685 Via Sierra
David & Mirella Mesrobian
787 Castle Pines Drive
Robert Millar & Mario Guriso
78‐165 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Beau & Nancy Miller
78‐002 San Timoteo
Eileen Mohler
78‐153 San Timoteo
Renee Monroe
Spyglass Hill
Mary & Jim Montgomery
49‐300 Avenida Fernando
Roper & Kelly Morris
49‐800 Coachella Drive
Jim & Denise Murphy
77‐947 Lago Drive
Jennifer Murray
78‐015 Coronados Circle
Judee Myers
50255 Doral Street
Joe & Stacy Nemeth
78‐144 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Richard & Sharon Nevins
78‐635 Mandarina
Jim & Diane Nichols
49‐841 Coachella Drive
Carol Lynn Noack
77‐990 Lago Drive
Bob Noack
49‐251 Avenida Fernando
Malott & Nancy Nyhart
78‐013 Lago Drive
Dan & Beverly O’Connor
77‐490 Loma Vista
Matt & Trish O’Connor
49‐505 Coachella Drive
John & Kathy O’Keefe
78‐211 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Morgan & Larry Pfeiffer
49‐725 Anacapa Circle
Joe Perricone
49‐415 Avenida Montero
Zsuzsanna & Michael Pheil
48‐721 San Isidro
Cathleen & Shawn Pierce
49‐835 Lago Drive
Cheryl & Don Pope
49‐705 Coachella Drive
Peggy & Tom Pyle
78‐126 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Carolyn & Richard Randall
78991 Breckenridge Drive
Joel Raven
49‐814 Coachella Drive
Audrey Reed
50235 Doral Street
Steve & Jan Reenders
78‐268 Calle Las Rmblas
Gus Rendon & Anita Agzarian
50815 Nispero
Sandy Robbins
78‐570 Bottle Brush
Leni Roberts
78‐120 San Timoteo
Mark & Anita Roberts
78‐120 San Timoteo
Jim & Betty Robinson
49‐700 Coachella Drive
George & June Romine
49‐398 Avila Drive
Marian & Bob Rosenwasser
48‐608 Paseo Terazo
Mitch Rouse
49‐455 Coachella Drive
Kay Ruttman
48‐761 Coachella Drive
Toni Salhus
78‐080 Calle Norte
Cynthia Pistilli Savage & Paul Fournier
49‐885 Lago Drive
Joe Scaccia
50855 Grand Traverse
Robert & Kelly Scannell
49‐495 Avenida Montero
Kathy & Bob Schowe
49‐407 Guijarro Drive
Mary & Morgan Shay
49‐823 Adelito Drive
Nancy Shuma
78‐269 Hacienda La Quinta Drive
Sarah & Don Siegmund
49‐705 Anacapa Circle
Gary & Melanie Singer
78‐435 Coyote Canyon Court
Bill & Carol Slifer
78‐023 San Timoteo
Tom & Mary Michael Sterchi
78‐096 Coronados
George & Jean Stephenson
48‐751 San Dimas Street
John & Angie Stout
49‐685 Anacapa Drive
Michael & Betty Terry
78‐083 San Timoteo
Kelly Trembley
78453 Calle Huerta
Dr. Danielle Ulian
78‐230 Lago Drive
Celeste Varela
49960 Avila Drive
OD & Jana Vincent
78745 Avenida La Jarita
Carter & Meg Wagner
78‐067 San Timoteo
Ken & Tracy Wallis
47‐800 Eisenhower Drive
Linda Weil
49‐695 Coachella
Susan & Jim Weir
49‐578 Avila Drive
Helen & Dick Welsh
50505 Grand Traverse Avenue
Charles & Penny Wentworth
77‐144 Lago Drive
Donna Westgate
78800 Castle Pines Drive
Kevin & Kimberly White
78815 Grand Traverse
Joni & Dave Wilson
77‐975 Lago Drive
Nancy Winton
49980 Calle Estrada
Marian Wood
78‐133 Lago Drive
Lacey & Ashlyn Wooden
52795 Avenida Navarro
Steve & Alice Wright
77965 Grey Wolf Trail
Josie & Griffin Yoon
78‐083 Calle Norte
Carl & Ali Zinn
49‐200 Avenida Fernando
NOTE:  All of the individuals shown above provided their specific request to be added to the petition because they object to the project.  These requests were via email, and those emails are available for inspection.  In addition, here are some notable quotes, made with attribution:
“This project is not acceptable due to the safety for children and congestion at a very busy intersection with high speed traffic!!!!”  ‐ John O’Keefe “You absolutely have my permission to add my name to this petition. I am totally against this project as projected . We are already overpopulated! The city needs to do the right thing for their voters and population and turn down this ridiculous proposal.” – Leni Roberts “Please add our name. I already sent a letter to the LQ council in opposition but that shouldn’t affect its standing. I watched the planning commission hearing last week and I’m pleased that the chairwoman and a majority voted it down. I would think the LQ city council wouldn’t vote against a project opposed by their chair but one never knows what special interests lurk behind the curtain.”  ‐ Malott Nyhart
“The planned structure sounds horrific especially as it is higher than the 22 foot code.”  ‐ Jennifer Murray
“Thanks for the work you are doing to curtail a totally inappropriate development.  Don’t know if you get up near Jefferson and 111, but the development that has sprung out of the ground this past year is unsightly and incredibly dense.  It isn’t in the middle of town like the one at 50th would be, but still is an abomination!” – Kay Brehm “Please add us to the petition opposing the high density housing complex proposed by out of state developers for the 50th Avenue/Washington intersection in LaQuinta. The increased danger to school children who cross that intersection on a daily basis for school and the Boys & Girls Club is of great concern to us. The density of the project for an already very busy, heavily traveled area is far too much.”  ‐ Mary Michael Sterchi “You can add my name for sure! This high density development would be a disaster for the community and belongs somewhere else!”  ‐ Tom Maloney
“We are totally against this project. It would be a nightmare on several levels.”  ‐ Bert McCabe “We do not think it is an appropriate development in the highly contested area.” – Bill McKamey
“Absolutely agree and please add our names.  Sera‐Lynn and I in support of the opposition to this project. We are very adverse to the potential for this and glad to see other friends and neighbors are as well.” – Rob Florek
“We agree with your petition and ask you to add both our names.  We are especially concerned about the height, number of units, and access to 50th Avenue.  We don’t know of any other structures nearby that are as high as the planned new development.  The need for U‐turns is particularly dangerous at the intersection of Moon River and 50th where so many children are present.” – Patricia Hogan
“Count us in! Thank you for taking the time to put together that very cogent letter.   I had no idea this would become a real threat.   It seems so obvious to be a terrible location, and there are so many lots more suitable.”  ‐ Suzie Lewis
“Thank you so much to you and all of the others pushing back on a project that probably has way too much density compared to the surrounding neighborhoods.   Hopefully the zoning they currently have is not compatible with the huge development. They are proposing which would give the city the opportunity to tell them they need to design their project within the zoning jurisdiction.   Good Luck trying to get them to lower the density o their project which is completely surrounded by very nice single‐family homes.”  ‐ John Kramer “ Please add Julie and I on your list. The project is out of character to our area in La Quinta and is way too high density.”  ‐ Perry Johnson
“Yes, you have my permission to add my name to the petition. It sounds like a terrible plan. Not soundly put together.”  ‐ Tina Everson
“Please add our names.  I have been reading about it on the La Quinta news I get each day.   We certainly don't want it.  I did read where they came back and changed several things that were asked to be changed during the last city council meeting.  However, I think we want an apartment complex at all at that corner...”  ‐ Marsha Soday “I have been active against this particular development.  We also believe the level of traffic, the congestion and safety next to the school and the boys and girls club is just unacceptable.”  ‐ Joe Nemeth
“We also believe the level of traffic, the congestion and safety next to the school and the boys and girls club is just unacceptable.”  ‐ Stacy Nemeth
“We drove by the empty lot yesterday. It’s huge! Certainly somebody can develop it into something attractive and appropriate for our community. – Beth Barnes “You have my permission to read my name as being AGAINST approval by the City Council at its upcoming meeting regarding the proposed project at Washington and 50th Streets in La Quinta.

I am particularly distressed that it is being proposed by an out‐of‐state company that has no interest in the community whatsoever, other than its own financial benefit. While I understand the general appeal of developing the property so that it no longer remains a vacant lot, including something that would increase the tax base of the City, there has to be a better approach which is in greater keeping with and benefit to the surrounding area, and which has a lesser impact on an already exceedingly busy intersection plagued by high speed traffic, often too heavy for the community at times.” ‐ Joel Raven

“You absolutely have my permission to add my name to this petition. I am totally against this project as projected . We are already overpopulated! The city needs to do the right thing for their voters and population and turn down this ridiculous proposal. – Leni Roberts “The density of the project for an already very busy intersection, and the additional dangers the school children will face traveling to and from their schools and the Boys & Girls Club are the primary concerns for us. – Tom Sterchi
1 From: Tania Flores
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 7:50 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: For City Council 8/1 meeting: Petitions re Planned Apartments: Avenue 50 & Washington Attachments: July 6 Petition Letter.docx; Petition Letter No. 2.docx Please see public comment below and attached regarding the La Quinta Village Apartments. I have not issued a response.

Tania Flores, CMC | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760) 777-7023
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Mary Montgomery <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2023 2:31 PM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: For City Council 8/1 meeting: Petitions re Planned Apartments: Avenue 50 & Washington ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Dear Tania,
Attached is the petition I dropped off at City Hall on July 7 showing the names and LaQuinta addresses for the 311 individuals who asked that their names be added to those IN OPPOSITION to the Apartment complex planned for Avenue 50 & Washington.

Can you please add these two petitions showing the 360 names of those IN OPPOSITION into the public record comments and confirm to me these 360 names will become part of the public comments.

Many thanks for your assistance.

Mary E. Montgomery
49300 Avenida Fernando
La Quinta 92253
TO:   LaQuinta City Council Members
RE:   Proposed Project:  NE Corner of Washington & Avenue 50 We urge the City Council NOT to approve this project for the following reasons:
 At 252 units, some 3‐story (and without elevators), this proposed development is too dense for the surrounding neighborhoods.  (Without the so‐called “Density Bonus”, code for developing this property is 177 units.)
 With 522 parking spaces, traffic on Avenue 50 is sure to increase significantly, resulting in less safety and increased noise and light pollution, thus impairing quality of life and, in some cases, interrupting view corridors of existing residents.  The proposed height of the three‐story units is 28 feet, six feet or 27% above the 22‐ foot code.
 There are questions about the whether the proposed development compromises the safety of children who attend the nearby Middle School and Boys & Girls Club, located at Moon River Drive.  Many of these children walk, roller blade or ride their bikes to/from school.  The safety situation is exacerbated by the U‐turns at Eastbound Avenue 50 and the Park/Moon River intersection that will be required to access the proposed property.
 The property is owned by a company in Oregon; the developer is in Costa Mesa with little vested interest in preserving the quality of life that we have come to enjoy as LaQuinta residents.

We agree that development this vacant property is inevitable and can be a positive for the City.

BUT it can and should be developed in a manner that maintains the charm, style and serves to preserve the peace and view corridors of LaQuinta, as other developments in or near Old Town have achieved to good effect.

Chip & Brett Benner
77470 Loma Vista
Todd & Michelle Biersack
78490 Calle Remo
Sarah Blaisdell
50665 Cypress Point Drive
Steve Bock
78983 Breckenridge Drive
Tim Carlson
78775 Grand Traverse
Ruth Cottingame
50225 Grand Traverse Avenue
Diane Crystal & Jack Scott
50857 Cereza
Christina & Leo Coulourides
48905 El Nido
Kathryn Evenson & Charles Edwards
50565 Grand Traverse
Sally Farwell
50505 Spyglass Hill Drive
Doug Fascenelli
78971 Indian Wood Ct
Larry Garcia
50740 Grand Traverse
Holly & Jay Jensen
78074 Lago
Kathy Jones
78943 Breckenridge Drive
Janet Kennedy
78903 Breckenridge Drive
Victoria Lindsey
78999 Breckenridge Drive
Grant Maples
78730 Castle Pines Drive
Debbie Marquez
50425 Grand Traverse
David & Mirella Mesrobian
78785 Castle Pines
Cheryl Nelson
50800 Grand Traverse
John Peterson
78340 Toronja
Jeffrey & Christy Quiggle
78015 Lago
Leslie & Shannon Ransdall
49970 Coachella Drive
Susan & William Reveal
50245 Grand Traverse
Ann & Art Rundle
78835 Castle Pines
Barbara Sirna
78044 Calle Norte
Mike Sidley
Leticia Gonzalez
49400 Avenida Club La Quinta
Patricia Sidley
49415 Avenida Club La Quinta
Maureen Skeese
50115 Doral Street
Doug & Dianna Smith
50440 Spyglass Hill Drive
Anne Smith
78740 Castle Pines Drive
Tim Wallender
78645 Castle Pines
Ruth Waytz
78477 Calle Orense
Nancy Weinberger
78680 Castle Pines
Nanette & Michael Wobber
78805 Grand Traverse
1 From: Sandy Robbins <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 11:58 AM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Letter for City Council Meeting 8/1
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Good morning, Ms. Flores,
Attached is my letter for the City Council for their review regarding the La Quinta Apartment complex up for discussion at tonight's meeting.

This message and any attachments may contain confidential or privileged information and are only for the use of the intended recipient of this message. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify the sender by return email, and delete or destroy this and all copies of this message and all attachments. Any unauthorized disclosure, use, distribution, or reproduction of this message or any attachments is prohibited and may be unlawful. 1 July 31, 2023
Dear Ms. Flores and Members of the City Council;
I am writing to you today regarding the proposed development of La Quinta Village apartments (formerly Troutdale Apartments). I have several significant concerns regarding this project in the proposed location of Washington/50th.

1. The project only has seven guest parking spots. The neighboring homes on Saguaro Road, Bottlebrush Drive, Date Palm, and Sagebrush Avenue will be significantly impacted by visitors visiting their friends and family and potentially overflowing parking from residents. The adjacent homes on Saguaro Road, Bottlebrush Drive, Date Palm, and Sagebrush Avenue should not have to endure the burden of the overflow parking from the proposed La Quinta Village apartments, nor should the neighboring homes have to get a parking permit from the City of La Quinta to be able to park in front of their own home. The project should be designed with adequate guest parking. The Developer should eliminate their outdoor recreational areas or cut back on the number of units being built and provide more guest parking for the development.

2. The ingress and egress off of Washington is an inferior access for the proposed project. Cars traveling south on Washington will have to make a U-turn or go completely around on 48th to Jefferson to 50th then back to Washington since there is a no U-turn sign at Washington/50th. This will cause a tremendous traffic backup during school traffic hours on 50th.

3. The Traffic study was completed in April 2023. The traffic study was not conducted during the busiest time of the season. Most snowbirds go home after the winter season is over on April 1 of each year. The new traffic will not reflect the accuracy of how many cars travel Washington and 50th daily. The new traffic study should be made available to the public 72 hours before the Planning or City Counsil meeting tomorrow. As I write this letter to you, the new traffic study is unavailable on the Developer's website. The Developer's website is currently down and not working.

4. Environmental report and assessment - The proposed development is adding approximately over 1500 car daily traffic patterns and the environment. Has a new study and assessment been completed to see the impact of the air and noise on neighboring homes? A new study should be completed since the project has changed.

5. The building project height of the buildings is higher than allowed by the City of La Quinta zoning ordinance. The architecture is different from the surrounding homes in the area. The height of the buildings looks into the neighboring houses and yards on Saguaro Road.
2 6. The neighboring homes on Saguaro Road have to look at the 10ft wall from their backyards. There is nothing aesthetically pleasing about looking at a blank wall of nothing.

7. Water - How does the City of La Quinta plan to handle the new contract between the State of California and the Fed's to reduce the amount of water the State of California receives from the Colorado River with this new development?

8. The current power grid cannot handle the new development and will require an upgrade. At who's expense?
This project is adverse development for the surrounding homes and schools, including resale value, traffic, safety for bicyclists and pedestrians, and environmental impacts. This property would be better suited for one-two story senior development, or single-family homes would be a better fit for this property.

Thank you for your time in reviewing my letter and concerns.

Yours truly,
Sandy Robbins

1 -----Original Message-----
From: Kelly Scannell <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, July 29, 2023 2:25 PM
To: Cheri Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Fwd: Troutdale Residences written comments
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. **
Dear Cheri,
My husband, Bob, and I live in Montero Estates, the neighborhood in La Quinta directly across the street on Washington for the proposed Troutdale project. We listened to the public hearings and have some serious concerns with the project as proposed. We are concerned about the following:

1. Density for that property

2. Traffic with only one lane on 50th Ave and only one entrance on Washington.

3. Noise for the increase in traffic and for the addition of so many homes 4. The design is nothing like anything else on Washington after you cross Hwy 111 5. Where will excess parking be for visitors to the apartments
We appreciate that the property will be developed but ask that the city consider the above.

In addition, please consider the impact on the Montero community specifically. We exit out the gate on Washington and make a u-turn on Sagebrush. The addition of hundreds of cars will make crossing multiple lanes dangerous. The alternative is to go back down to 50th to make a u-turn which will only add to the potential increased congestion from the new residences.

While the developer claimed to have contacted the neighborhoods that would be impacted, no one in our neighborhood has yet been contacted by the developer of the planned project.

Thank you for taking our concerns into consideration.

Kelly and Bob Scannell
49495 Avenida Monte
Sent from my iPad
1 Monika Radeva
From: Tania Flores
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 12:18 PM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Danny Castro; Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: Ave 50/Washington Opposition Letter
Attachments: IMG_0002.pdf
Please see attached public comment letter regarding the La Quinta Village Apartments. I have not sent a response.

Tania Flores, CMC | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760) 777-7023
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Jim Schmidt <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 12:14 PM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Ave 50/Washington Opposition Letter
** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important To La Quinta City Council
RE: Ave 50 and Washington
Dear Council,
I am writing today to express my opposition to the purposed La Quinta Village Apartments on Ave 50 and Washington in La Quinta. I have been a resident here for over 25 years and do not feel that this is the right project for this location.

I attended all the planning committee meetings in person and was pleased to find out the most on the committee had the same concerns as myself and many others in the community. As a result, the agreed not to recommend this project to full council. My main objections are the following:

Two and Three story apartments to do fit in with this community of mostly single family homes. I am guessing from third floor you could see in other surroundings homes? The architecture does not match the surrounding area.

The traffic is bad now and will only get worse with project adding some additional 1500 daily trips. Car pass at 50 plus mph now and we have two schools close by. Lots of children walking around this intersection.

View obstruction for many longtime residents near Sage Brush, not fair. lncreased noise and light.

Others and I realize something will eventually be developed on this lot. This is simply not the right project. One site that was discussed was Washington and Fred Waring which is surrounded by 2 story buildings. This is the corridor to South La Quita and should be considered a prime location to celebrate our beautiful city.

Sincerely,
-
2Zar
Jim Schmidt - President Casitas 1 HOA, Montero Estates LQ

1 From: Ellen Way <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 31, 2023 8:34 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Subject: Public Comment - La Quinta Village Apartment Proposal Attachments: LQ Village Apartments Opposition Letter.docx ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** La Quinta City Clerk’s office,
Thank you for incorporating the attached public comment letter into the August 1, 2023 City Council meeting public record. The letter is regarding Item #2 under Public Hearing, La Quinta Village Apartment proposal.

Kindest regards,
Mike and Ellen Way
July 30, 2023
The Honorable Linda Evans, Mayor
The Honorable Steve Sanchez, Mayor Pro Tem
The Honorable Kathleen Fitzpatrick
The Honorable Deborah McGarrey
The Honorable John Pena
Dear La Quinta City Council Members:

My name is Ellen Way, my home is located at 49500 Rancho San Francisquito in the Talante development of La Quinta. I am writing regarding Public Hearing Item #2, 252‐Unit Apartment Project, La Quinta Village Apartments, on the Tuesday, August 1, 2023, City Council agenda.

My husband and I have been residents of La Quinta since 1992. We have owned our home and raised our two daughters in the Talante Community for the past 20 years.

We understand that affordable housing is needed in our community. We moved here as young adults and we experienced first‐hand the challenge of finding affordable housing. We support genuine efforts to build affordable housing, we just don’t believe this project is being proposed in the right location and the rental prices are not affordable to the people who need them most.

We oppose this project for the following reasons:

1. The traffic congestion that this development will create on Washington Street and Avenue 50 will severely impact everyone in the surrounding area. We understand the traffic study for this proposal was completed during the pandemic and does not accurately calculate the current traffic congestion in this area. Tenants driving south on Washington will have to make a U‐turn at Avenue 50 to enter the complex, which will also cause increased congestion.

2. This development is located near a sports complex, two schools, and a Boys & Girls Club which together create a great deal of traffic congestion in this area. We believe there is also a safety concern adding more cars to an area where parents are parking, delivering/picking‐up children, and children are walking to and from the facilities.

3. We believe that for people who truly need affordable housing to live in this development there is the possibility that more people will live in the complex than is projected, therefore, increasing the number of cars driving in and out and parking in the development.

We thank you for considering our comments and we hope you will vote NO on this proposal.

Kindest regards,
Mike and Ellen Way
49500 Rancho San Francisquito, La Quinta
1 From: Tania Flores
Sent: Friday, July 28, 2023 11:01 AM
To: City Clerk Mail
Cc: Cheri Flores
Subject: FW: Irwin Partners hearing RE: Washington and Ave 50 (APN 646-070-016 Importance: High
Good morning Clerks,
Please see public comment received regarding La Quinta Village Apartments.

Thank you.

Tania Flores, CMC | Administrative Technician
Design & Development Department
City of La Quinta
78495 Calle Tampico | La Quinta, CA 92253
Ph. (760) 777-7023
[email protected]
www.LaQuintaCA.gov
From: Ruth Waytz <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 26, 2023 5:24 PM
To: Tania Flores <[email protected]>
Subject: Irwin Partners hearing RE: Washington and Ave 50 (APN 646‐070‐016 ** EXTERNAL: This message originated outside of the City of La Quinta. Please use proper judgement and caution when opening attachments, clicking links or responding to requests for information. ** Hello ‐
My name is Ruth Waytz and I live in Montero Estates, across from the proposed apartments at Washington and Avenue

50. I have attended the Planning Commission meetings and voiced my opposition to this terrible project.

I'm grateful the planning commission decided not to recommend this project go forward. There are so many problems! I'm not sure which I think is the most serious, so this is a random order.

Traffic
Contrary to what the developer claims, traffic will be dramatically increased at and and near this corner for several reasons. The entry gate can accommodate only three cars, meaning we will frequently see traffic backed up onto the streets. Access will require a massive increase in U‐turns, which are already incredibly dangerous. The developer said something like 10 additional U‐turns per day. 500 residents and only 10 people leaving the house per day? Wrong. And insulting.
2 Mention was made of widening of Avenue 50 as part of the proposed bridge project. I know you know that project could take six years to complete and hasn't even started. The developer is acting as if Avenue 50 already has that extra lane. It doesn't.

Architectural style
I know they claim they revised the style and now it's "Mediterranean," but it still looks like glorified storage units or a Residence Inn to me. It's a giant eyesore and it doesn't look like anything else anywhere around it.

I'm not sure how that piece of land got rezoned, but everything around it is low density. Everything. I know the developer knocked back their request from high density to medium high, but that is still way more than our neighborhood can tolerate.

One of the speakers at one of the planning commission meetings treated us to a lovely history of the historic architectural style of La Quinta. This project does not fit in with our style and theme. It's big, cheap, and ugly.

Further, the development still has three‐story buildings, inadequate parking, and no elevators. This is a hazard for older or disabled residents, as well as anybody who might want to move a piece of furniture into their apartment. In the last planning commission meeting, the developer flat out admitted the elevators would have been too expensive. What other safety corners are they cutting?
Low income/affordable housing
Much has been said about this, and the City's mandate to add affordable housing ~ but this isn't that! This complex will not have low income housing. Its lower priced units are roughly 600 ft.² and about $2000 a month. I don't know where that counts as affordable housing, but those prices are not low and I don't think you could get a roommate in a 600 square‐foot apartment.

Irwin Partners
This developer is already notorious for breaking/ignoring laws. This is a very slippery slope. Dealing with someone whose response to being made aware of the law and still deliberately breaking it is, "so sue me" is less than ideal.

Power station
Yes, we could use a new Power Station, and this complex absolutely cannot exist on the current grid. But this expansion is no gift, and I'm not willing to let the developer ruin our neighborhood with promises that benefit IID and the city like someone jangling car keys to distract a baby.

NIMBY
I'm aware of the objections to our objections, stating something is going to be developed on that corner, no matter what, and that anyone opposed is a "Karen" or a crybaby. I'm certain that corner will be developed, but we have an obligation to the city of La Quinta and its residents to maintain our quality of life and aesthetics. This is just the wrong project for this corner.

I know you're going to get lots more letters that go into more detail. I never seem to be able to think of everything when I sit down to write, but I want my opinion recorded and counted. I will be attending the meeting on August 1.

Thank you for your time and consideration,
~ Ruth
(Turns out this phone isn't full of candy after all.)

La Quinta City CouncilAugust 1, 2023

La Quinta City Council
August 1, 2023