Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout06-16-1999 Agenda 5ASARATOGA CITY COUNCIL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY NO.: ~ ~~ AGENDA ITEM: I MEETING DATE: June 16,1999 CITY MANAGER: ORIGINATING DEPT.: Community Development~7 DEPT. HEAD• SUBJECT: UP-97-004.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Starbucks Coffee Co. Appeal of Planning Commission approval to modify a previously approved Use Permit for a Starbucks coffee shop in the Argonaut Shopping Center. The original Use Permit was granted fora 1,160 square foot coffee shop. The applicants requested a modification to the Use Permit to expand into another tenant space for a total of 1,600 square feet. The applicants also requested permission to have nine tables for outdoor seating. RECOMMENDED MOTION: Deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of the modified Use Permit. REPORT SUMMARY: This Use Permit was originally approved by the Planning Commission at the meeting of July 23, 1997. Because permits for the renovation of the entire Argonaut Shopping Center were still being reviewed and work had not yet begun, the applicants postponed exercising their Use Permit. As renovation of the Center was underway, the applicants had an opportunity to occupy a larger space and they applied to have their Use Permit modified to allow them to occupy a 1,600 square foot space rather than the 1,160 square foot space originally approved. They also requested to provide outdoor seating. At the July, 1997 meeting, concerns were raised by neighbors and Commissioners .regarding litter potentially accumulating around the coffee shop. As a result, a condition was added to the Resolution requiring that the applicants submit a Maintenance Plan to the City for review and approval. The Maintenance Plan would include provisions for sweeping and litter pick-up. Hours of operation were also limited to between 5:30 a.m. and 11:00 p.m. Neighbors were further concerned about additional traffic, but it was staff's determination that the additional traffic generated by the shop would not significantly impact street traffic or circulation within the parking lot. At the April 28, 1999 Planning Commission meeting, the Commission considered the request for interior expansion and outdoor seating. Many of the same neighbors attended that meeting and UP-97-004.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Starbucks Coffee Co. reiterated their past concerns and expressed further concerns relating to litter, traffic, parking and noise from customers sitting outdoors. Staff felt that the original findings relating to litter, traffic and parking could still be made and that the noise from the outdoor seating would be limited to the confines of the arcade around the building. The applicants also agreed to post outdoor signs asking patrons to be respectful of the neighbors and keep conversations quite and to not litter. It was further noted that the Planning Commission retains continuing jurisdiction over Use Permits and can call them up for reconsideration if there are unforeseen future problems associated with the use. After visiting the property, reviewing Planning staffs analysis and hearing testimony from interested parties present at the public hearing, the Commission voted 5-1 (Chair Bernald opposed and Commissioner Martlage absent) to approve the modified Use Permit with an additional condition that the building signage on the Blauer Drive side not be illuminated. The applicant has since submitted an exhibit depicting the amount floor area dedicated to seating, storage and restrooms to show the City Council that the increase in floor area is primarily in the storage area and for an additional restroom. The number of seats would go up from the originally approved plan of 21 to 28 with the new proposal. Outdoor seating was originally proposed with the first design, but was removed voluntarily by the applicants prior to the Planning Commission hearing of July, 1997 due to neighborhood opposition -this is why outdoor seats are depicted in the exhibit for the original Use Permit. An additional 26 outdoor seats are now proposed. A neighboring property owner filed an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval on May 13, 1999. He has cited that both the Planning Commission and the Community Development Department have failed to enforce the Neighborhood Commercial zoning requirements, that no analysis of effects on traffic or parking has occurred and that outdoor seating would place an unreasonable and detrimental burden on the neighbors. In response, staff would just note that: • The Argonaut Shopping Center has existed at this location since at least 1960 -the approvals granted in 1996 were to renovate the existing poorly-maintained Center. • The Commercial Neighborhood zoning designation encourages neighborhood serving commercial activities, such as a coffee shop, over regional commercial uses, such as a furniture store or other similar uses. • At the time the renovation was considered, a traffic, circulation and parking analysis was prepared to assess the impacts of additional traffic at, and around, the site. This study was also used as a basis for determining how many total Center parking spaces were needed given the anticipated mix of retail and restaurant-type uses that would locate in the Center. The Center is designed to accommodate the number of parking spaces needed for the coffee shop. In conclusion, since a Use Permit has been previously granted for a Starbucks coffee shop at this location, the primary issue the City Council is being asked to reconsider is the outdoor seating. Staff has supported the outdoor seating as an attractive amenity to the Argonaut Shopping Center that would provide a certain degree of pedestrian activity and interest. UP-97-004.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, Starbucks Coffee Co. FISCAL IMPACTS: Negligible. ADVERTISING, NOTICING AND PUBLIC CONTACT: A hearing notice was mailed to surrounding property owners within 500 feet of the subject property and published in the Saratoga News. CONSEQUENCES OF NOT ACTING ON RECOMMENDED MOTION(S): If the City Council reverses the Planning Commission's decision and grants the appeal, the project will be denied as presented. The original Use Permit still allows for the 1,160 square foot shop without outdoor seating. FOLLOW UP ACTIONS: The City Attorney shall prepare a Resolution for the next available meeting memorializing the decision of the City Council on this matter. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Planning Commission Minutes dated Apri128, 1999 2. Staff Memorandum dated Apri128, 1999 (w/ minutes from July 23, 1997) 3. Resolution UP-97-004.1 4. Appeal Application from Chris Hawks dated May 13, 1999 5. Additional neighborhood Correspondence 6. Exhibit submitted by applicant indicating changes in square footage 7. Exhibit "A", plans PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE - 2 - Technical Corrections to Packet No technical corrections to the packet were noted. CONSENT CALENDAR 1. F-98-005 & V-99-004 (503-75-020) -HENRY, 21801 Congress Springs Lane; Request for Fence Permit approval to enclose more than 4,000 square feet of a rear yard. The site is 3.3 acres and is located within a Hillside Residential zoning district. (CONTINUED TO 5/12/99 IN ORDER TO BE RE-NOTICED TO INCLUDE VARIANCE REQUEST). --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PIERCE MOVED TO APPROVE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 1 BY MINUTE ACTION. THE MOTION CARRIED 6-0 WITH COMMISSIONER MARTLAGE ABSENT. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. UP-97-004.1 (393-O1-024, -025, -026, -027, -028, & 393-02-003) - STARBUCKS, 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road; Request for modification to an approved Use Permit fora 1,160 sq. ft. space by expanding the restaurant into an additional 440 sq. ft. of the existing Argonaut Shopping Center. The modification application includes a request to allow outdoor seating without additional parking spaces. The property is located within a Commercial Neighborhood zoning district. Planner Bradley presented the staff report. She informed the Commission that staff has determined that the four additional parking spaces to accommodate the outdoor seating would not be necessary as the busiest hours of the business would be the early morning hours when many of the other shops in the center are closed. She indicated that the aggregate parking of the shopping center was sufficient. She said that noise, litter and traffic have been the primary concerns of the surrounding neighbors. Staff has determined that the additional seating will not have a noticeable impact on traffic and that noise should be kept within the confines of the buildings exterior arcade and that litter will be kept clean by the employees. In addition, the resolution of approval contains a condition pertaining to litter removal. If any of these issues become a problem in the future, the Planning Commission always has the authority to impose further restrictions on the business. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the use permit. She clarified that staff has been informed by the applicant that no coffee roasting is to occur at this location. Chairwoman Bernald opened the public hearing at 7:43 p.m. Drew Padilla, applicant/project architect, stated that he would answer questions relating to the architectural features, handicap accessibility and code compliance. He said that the nature of the extension of this permit is to provide for a greater amount of square footage than was previously provided in an earlier review of the use permit as well as to provide for outdoor seating. It was his belief that the addition of outdoor seating at this particular shopping center will help vitalize not only the sidewalk landscape underneath the arcade, but also the relationship of the store to the parking lot. The nature of the work being done to the shopping center is one that would encourage an aggregate use of the parking spaces as well as providing a more pleasant pedestrian environment. Commissioner Patrick said that in looking at the plans, the additional square footage to be added is almost equal to the new outdoor seating area which is being taken from the original plan. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE - 3 - Mr. Padilla informed the Commission that there may be a misinterpretation on the plans. The actual increase in square footage is occurring to the rear of the space. He said that the project is approximately the same square footage. He confirmed that tables, chairs and lounge chairs are proposed outside of the building and that it is proposed to move the bathroom and kitchen further back on the Blauer Drive side. He said that he expects patrons to enter through an entrance provided by the shopping center which will be retained as a secondary means of egress. Lisa Trexler, speaking for Mary Bogdanovich, 20391. Blauer Drive, stated that her home is the first house past the shopping center. She stated that she strongly objects to Starbucks so close to the residential area and for the complete disregard to the peace and quiet of the residential neighborhood. She is speaking from the perspective that the city recognizes that this is a commercial operation located against a residential area and that the residents will experience a burden that is not felt by others in the city. The area residents will have an operation that begins at 6:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m., both quiet times when there is to be a lot more traffic. She said that new activities are being proposed with Starbucks and Blockbusters, both of which will produce traffic that will spill into the neighborhood. She felt that this was an inappropriate action against the neighborhood. She felt that Starbucks belongs in the center where it would not bother the neighbors, closer to Safeway which stays open 24-hours. She felt that it was a mistake to have approved the use on the corner. She said that both Blauer Drive and Regan Lane will be experiencing a great increase in traffic, some vehicles making u-turns to get onto Highway 9 or to avoid the stop light, winding their way out through the neighborhood. She said that the neighbors were led to believe that Starbucks was to locate somewhere in the middle of the shopping center and asked when this location was changed? She asked if an appropriate traffic analysis has been conducted as an EIR would have projected a traffic pattern? She requested to see the traffic analysis. She said that the Starbucks' location was unacceptable to her. Chris Hawks, 20390 Blauer Drive, stated that he was disappointed to have to return to the Commission to readdress this issue. He said that he was beginning to wonder if he made a mistake when he moved his family to Saratoga as he moved to Saratoga for the quite residential neighborhoods and the feeling of family, community and neighborhood. Anyone who has had the opportunity to look at the shops that were located in the shopping center had a clear idea of what sort of retail behavior existed (i.e., family oriented shops such as a barber shop, shoe repair, dance studio, travel agency with normal hours of operation.) If it is being stated that this is an acceptable location for Starbucks, he felt that a huge disconnect exists. He felt that Starbucks is a drastically different operation from all the other retail businesses that have been in this location. He noted that tl~e request before the Commission is a conditional use permit and that the Commission has the right and responsibility to determine if this particular use at this particular location is appropriate. He said that the neighborhood is not excited about seeing a Starbucks locating in the shopping center as there are concerns with traffic impacts to Blauer Drive. He felt that locating Starbucks at the center of the shopping center would be a more appropriate location. He expressed concern with the items listed in the staff report as follows: 1) If staff does not believe that there will be additional traffic, why is the business being expanded? He did not believe that a business would expand if there was not going to be additional traffic associated with the expansion. 2) Staff is recommending approval of signage for the business even though the applicant did not include signage as part of the application. He felt that a three foot, internally illuminated 30+ foot above ground sign has to be the highest illuminated outdoor sign in Saratoga without being requested by the applicant. 4) The nearest residence is Located I00 feet from the outdoor arcade and will result in a noise impact to the residents. 5) The resolution states that the use is not materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity and that appropriate conditions have been placed on the project. He expressed concern that a Starbucks, located 160 feet from residences, would impact damage property values, especially if there is outdoor seating available from 6:00 a.m. until 11:00 p.m. He stated that PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE - 4 - another site has always been available for this use. This is the third time that area residents have come before the Commission and that it would be a fourth time for the signage issue. He noted that Starbucks started in the middle of the shopping center and that it has incrementally moved its way down the shopping center. He felt that there should be a time that the city stands up and state that area residents matter too. He encouraged the Commission to consider the area residents concerns this evening. Bill Mullen, 12960 Regan Lane, stated that he originally understood that Starbucks was to be located in the center of the shopping center. He said that at that time, it was not pleasing but that it was a tolerable situation. He said that the latest communication is that it is to be located at the end of the shopping center and that it is to be expanding its footprints, raising significant issues. He expressed concern with the following: 1) noise impacts associated with outside seating, changing the nature of the neighborhood; and 2) safety concern for the neighborhood and the community, specifically on Regan Lane as this is as shortcut to the shopping center. He said that the expansion would result in the attraction of individuals outside the neighborhood who would like to by pass Saratoga Avenue. He expressed concern with the safety of young individuals in the neighborhood and evening walkers as the neighborhood has no sidewalks or lighting. He felt that Starbucks would increase the traffic pattern and increase the safety risk to the neighborhood. The lack of addressing this concern is extremely short coming. He felt that the city has taken the neighborhood and significantly changed the climate and the atmosphere that most individuals paid a tremendous amount of money to acquire. Mark Kocir, 12795 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, stated that he has been a long time resident of Saratoga, being a resident before the shopping center was built. He said that he did not support a Starbucks in Saratoga, noting that there is not a business that looks like it in the Village. He felt that this use belongs on Lawrence Expressway. He was advised that the proposed hours of operation were 6:30 a.m. to 11:0 p.m. He felt that the hours were too long as this is a residential neighborhood, even though a commercial strip zone is located in this area. He said that residents do not want cars coming in and out of the shopping center. He informed the Commission that "kids" hang out at Safeway and the parking lot, often times resulting in the police being called to the shopping center. He felt that once Starbucks establishes a foothold similar to Safeway, they would request a 24-hour operation. He felt that the city was forgetting that this is a residential neighborhood based on the renovation of the Argonaut Shopping Center. Denise Levy, 12915 Regan Lane, stated that she also attended several meetings relating to the shopping center. She stated that her main concern was that of her seven year old who rides her bike to school with her father. She also has a fourteen year old son going to school. The atmosphere of having Starbucks on the corner is a nightmare to her. She felt that the middle of the shopping center would be more conducive location for Starbucks as it would be more pleasant than looking over the office buildings on Blauer and into the bedrooms of residential homes. She found that putting people outside, on sidewalks adjacent to residents would be a noise impact to adjacent residents. She stated her opposition to the request as she felt that there were better locations in the shopping center. She also expressed concern about the traffic and the safety of area children/residents. Bruce Prestwich, 20244 Blauer Drive, felt that the use permit was a big mistake, noting that Starbucks was denied at the Village. He said that he was lead to believe that Starbucks was to be located in the middle of the shopping center. He requested that the Commission deny this location and that the use be approved at another location where families and children would be subjected to the traffic associated with the use as Blauer Drive is already experiencing problems with traffic and speeding cars. Lisa Trailer, 20390 Blauer Drive, stated her opposition to the expansion and outdoor seating of the Starbucks Coffee Shop. She said that her sons' and her foster child's bedroom window face the shopping PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE-S- center. She expressed concern that the outdoor seating would give individuals the opportunity to observe her children. This condition was unacceptable and unsafe for her family. She said that the prior businesses in place before the shopping center was renovated closed well before 11:00 p.m. and did not infringe in the enjoyment of her yard in the evenings. She felt that Starbucks would be better located closer to Safeway where traffic, noise, and litter would not be an impact to neighbors. She felt that a new traffic study was warranted for the outdoor seating. She said that 15 parking spaces of 33 are proposed to the Blauer side of the building. Marcella Mahern, real estate manager for Starbucks, clarified that this application is for an amendment to an existing conditional use permit. The conditional use permit was granted for the site on this exact corner. When the landowner mentioned to Starbucks that there would be an opportunity to lease a bigger space, Starbucks took advantage of this fact because it wanted to create a store that had a nicer environment where additional components could be added to make the business more comfortable to its customers. The addition of outdoor seating was to go in with the overall vision of the shopping center to make it an inviting place where residents in the neighborhood would come and enjoy the outdoors. She did not believe that there would be a drastic increase in either traffic or seating capacity of the store. She sees Starbucks as serving individuals who are already passing by the shopping center on their daily commute or coming from the neighborhood. She said that she was not aware of the misconception that Starbucks was planned to be closer to Safeway. When the redevelopment of the shopping center was brought to Starbucks attention, Starbucks was offered the same space that it was originally offered. Therefore, there was not an alternative to Starbucks. She asked if the sign criteria was proposed to be modified this evening? She stated that Starbucks' sign will be in conformance with the sign criteria. Planner Bradley clarified that the sign program for the shopping center is up for review this evening, mainly to address the colors proposed at the end of the agenda. Paul Smith, Starbucks district manager, informed the Commission that Starbucks has systems in place in all of the stores where there employees collect trash on frequent intervals. At the last hearing, it was stated that someone will walk outside the store at least three to four times a day picking up trash. He clarified that the hours of operation are 5:30 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., opening at 6:00 a.m. on weekends. Commissioner Bradley clarified that the resolution before the Commission is identical to the one previously approved by the Commission with the exception of the requested modifications. Rhonda Rigenhagen, community relations manager for Starbucks, addressed the issue of noise and stated that it is just as important for Starbucks that this be an enjoyable environment for its customers who are also their neighbors. She said that noise has not been an issue with existing stores. She said that only 2 stores out of 200 in northern California have had some on going problems with noise, one relating to heating/air ventilation. Starbucks managers try to be responsive to concern or complaints relating to noise, trash or other issues in the neighborhood. She encouraged anyone who has problems to contact the store manager. If there is an issue and if it is not addressed to their satisfaction, that either Paul Smith or herself be contacted and that they would make sure that the issues are addressed. Commissioner Kaplan stated that she was instrumental in the last use permit review to get a commitment from Starbucks to police the grounds for trash. She stated then and states now that she feels that there is some laxity among the employees in performing this chore. She clarified that a use permit exists that would allow Starbucks to locate in the shopping center and that this is not the issue before the Planning Commission this evening. She said that the Commission expects that Starbucks will honor this part of the agreement because she will be watching to make sure that it is honored. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE-6- COMMISSIONERS KAPLAN/PATRICK MOVED TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. Commissioner Pierce stated that he grew up in the Argonaut area, living there for 20 years and his parents for 40 years. He said that he was familiar with the area and that he knows the shopping center quite well. He said that the Argonaut Shopping Center has been an on-going issue in his tenure on the Commission. The Commission has also dealt with Starbucks several times, having approved the conditional use permit for Starbucks for the shopping center following the public hearing. It was his belief that this is a good use for the shopping center and stated that he voted for it before and that he would be voting for it again. He said that he has observed several Starbucks in the greater San Jose area. He said that he was aware of Commissioner Kaplan's concern about trash. He felt that Starbucks was a well run organization and that it would be a credit to the city of Saratoga and to the shopping center. He stated that he understood the neighbors' concerns, acknowledging that the residents purchased their property knowing that they were buying property adjacent to a major shopping center in Saratoga. He felt that this was an appropriate use and that he would be supporting it. Commissioner Page said that this is his first review of the Starbucks' use permit. He said that he has visited several Starbucks and that he has observed and watched to see the operation as he knew that the use permit would be coming up. In reviewing the minutes of the last use permit hearing, there were a lot of questions whether there would be the addition of an outdoor seating area. He felt that the building overhang would deter some of the noise. He strongly recommended that signage be approved that would respect the neighbors. He also recommended that direction be given to the police department to patrol the area a little more in the beginning to ensure that the use stays friendly to the neighborhood. He stated that he could support the use permit knowing that the use permit can be called up if there are issues of concern. He said that he would be watching the use permit very closely. Commissioner Patrick concurred with the comments expressed by Commissioners Pierce and Page. She stated that various degrees of presentations have been made by the Starbucks' corporation representatives. She stated that she has observed a Starbucks near her office recently that installed outdoor seating because she had questions about what it would do to traffic near the area as it is located adjacent to an elementary school. She also observed the cleanliness and the noise factors. She stated that the noise factor was not an issue. She was not sure why people drinking coffee would be expected to be noisier than people in general. She stated that she would support the request because what the Commission is dealing with is a relatively minimal expansion in the square footage which should not impact the neighborhood. She felt that the outdoor seating is a nice addition to Saratoga and that it might make the shopping center more user friendly. Commissioner Kaplan stated that the reason a Starbucks was not approved at the Village was because there was not adequate parking in the Village and for the safety issue associated with the corner lot. She said that a use permit was granted to the Starbucks Corporation to use this location. The issue before the Commission is whether additional interior space and outdoor seating will be approved at the perimeter. She felt that individuals would meet quietly, talk, and visit. She noted that Safeway is a 24-hour establishment, serving a need. She said that Starbucks will not be opened 24-hours. She felt that citizens need a place to meet and that she felt that this is a minimal addition to the existing use permit. Therefore, she could support the request. Commissioner Murakami noted that from some of the testimony received from the neighbors, they had an idea that the proposed use was to be located at the middle of the shopping center. He said that some of the earlier plans may have depicted its location in the center of the shopping center. However, when the PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES APRIL 28, 1999 PAGE - 7 - Commission voted on the use permit last time, its location was clear at its present location. He was sorry that the neighbors did not notice its location at the time of the approval of the use permit. He concurred with his fellow Commissioners that the use permit was examined closely and that it would continue to be monitored to ensure that the business complies with the conditions to mitigate neighbors' concerns. He stated that he would also approve the request. Chairwoman Bernald stated that this is a difficult decision because she has seen how emotionally the neighbors are and that she understood their concerns. She said that it would be an ideal situation for the city to have a community area where it could have its young children meet, a community area where the city could make sure that the children can gather. However, given the fact that the neighbors are so emotional about this issue, she would be voting against the request. She informed the public that should the amendment to the use permit be approved, they would have 15-days to appeal the decision to the City Council. COMMISSIONERS PATRICK/PIERCE MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION NO. UP-97-004.1. THE MOT[ON CARRIED 5-1 WITH CHAIRMAN BERNALD VOTING NO AND COMMISSIONER MARTLAGE ABSENT. 3. UP-93-008.1 (503-24-072) -BLUE ROCK SHOOT-CUTLER/WHITE, 14523 Big Basin Way; Review of a Use Permit approved on December 14, 1994 to operate a restaurant on Big Basin Way with coffee roasting below the restaurant. The Planning Commission has requested this permit be called up for their review to re-evaluate the hours of operation and coffee roasting. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Planner Bradley informed the Commission that two letters were submitted this evening. One letter is from the business owner of Tiger, Tiger, Fine Decorating Gifts stating that the roasting of coffee beans drive her customers out as they are curious as to what is on fire. The smoke that comes into the shop makes the business owner's eyes water and leaves the order on the merchandise. It was requested that the offensive smoke and smell stop. Another letter was received from the business owner of Exclamation Point indicating that several customers have noticed and complained about the odor from coffee roasting during business hours. Classes are offered several days a week in which an individual could be at the business five hours at a time. The letter states that the smell from coffee roasting is pervasive. It was stated that the business would be in favor of a ban on coffee roasting in the Village area between the hours 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Planner Bradley indicated that the use permit for the Blue Rock Shoot Coffee Shop is before the Planning Commission to review the conditions of project approval. She said that both staff and Planning Commissioners have received complaints about coffee roasting at the business. Staff recommended that a condition be added to the original resolution to limit roasting to the hours of 7:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m. (overnight). She informed the Commission that the City has the authority to levy a fine of $250 per day if future violations were to occur. Commissioner Pierce asked how the coffee roasting hours were derived? Planner Bradley responded that staff tried to consider when most of the downtown business would be closed except for the restaurant uses and would have the least impact on the businesses and the neighbors. Chairwoman Bernald opened the public hearing at 8:35 p.m. Mitchell Cutler, partner at Blue Rock Shoot/Saratoga resident, stated that he was unclear why he was present this evening. He said that he was requested to be present to answer any questions which the Commission may have. He stated that he had conversations with Community Development Director Walgren who explained the concerns of a couple of residents about coffee roasting. At the request of 17El1 G~B~4 04 BOO @G~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Heather Bradley, Associate Planner DATE: April 2$,1999 SUBJECT: UP-97-004.1; Starbucks,12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road DESCRIPTION COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Jim Shaw Nick Streit Request for modification to the existing Use Permit to expand the approved size of the Argonaut Center coffee shop by 440 square feet from 1,160 to 1,600 square feet and to provide nine tables for outdoor seating. No additional parking spaces would be provided. DISCUSSION The subject application was heard by the Planning Commission on July 23rd, 1997. At that time the applicants had elinunated their proposal for outdoor seating in order to avoid controversy with the opposed neighbors. The minutes of the meeting reflect that a few of the Commissioners actually wanted to see outdoor seating. Those minutes are attached far reference. Parking/Traffic The additional 440 square feet of floor area allows for a seating increase from the 24 originally approved to 31 as shown on the current plan. The additional seating provided outdoors would add approximately 340 square feet of usable area and allow for 26 seats. There would be an additional 4 parking spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance for the additional outdoor seating area. The additional interior square footage is already accounted for in the parking requirements for the center. The requirement for the previous approval was 16 parking spaces, therefore a total of 20 spaces would be required. Because this application is subject to a Use Permit, the Planning Commission has the option of approving the outdoor seating without requiring the provision of additional parking spaces. When the Argonaut Center renovation plans were approved the number of parking spaces provided was 493 which was considered to be more than sufficient by the parking and traffic consultants who suggested a minimum of 393. This conclusion anticipated numerous food service uses in the center. Although the approved parking does fall short by 28 spaces of the 521 spaces required by the Zoning Ordinance, it is a generally accepted finding that the more uses that are collectively provided at a single destination, the less aggregate parking is needed. The restaurant wiii be busiest Printed do recycled paper. ~~V~V File No. UP-97.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road between the hours of 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. on weekdays and 9:00 to 11:00 on weekends when many of the other shops in the center are closed. This means that there should be also be adequate parking available. Staff does not believe that there will be any noticeable increase in traffic between the original approval and this proposal. It is not plausible that traffic would cut through the neighborhoods off Blauer, as the only people that would be able to find their way out would be the residents themselves. There is also a signal light at Blauer and Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road which should help keep traffic moving. Signage The applicant has indicated on the elevations that signage is not a part of the application submittal. However the proposal is very similar to what was previously approved with the logo on the side and front window and a "Starbucks Coffee" sign on the front. This proposal does show an additional "Starbucks Coffee" sign on the side. A sign program has been adopted for the new center, but is in the process of being modified. When the program is finalized staff can approve the proposed Signage so long as it is consistent with the adopted sign program. Noise/Litter Many of the neighbors have expressed concerns about potential noise and litter problems. Staff believes that the adjacent neighbors are an adequate distance away from the site and that noise impacts should be minimal. The nearest residence is approximately 160 feet from the outdoor seating area. The tables seat two to four people and,the conversations should be kept within the arcade of the building. The provision of trash receptacles and 'regular busing of tables should prevent litter from becoming a problem. A condition was added to the previous approval to address litter which was problem with the previous owners of the center. That condition is still in this new Resolution. Conclusion Staff has determined that the additional area of expansion and outdoor seating is consistent with the originally approved plans and would have a negligible impact on traffic and parking at the Argonaut Center. If noise, litter, or parking do become a problem in the future the Planning Commission can use their authority to call the Use Permit back for further review. RECOMENDATION Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the application by adopting the attached Resolution DR-97-004.1. ATTACI~IMENTS 1. Resolution UP-97-004.1 (replaces UP-97.004) 2. Minutes from Planning Commission meeting of July 23rd, 1997 3. Plans Exhibit "A" OU0002 PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION MINUTES JULY 23, 1997 City Council Chambers, 13777 Fruitvale Ave. Regular Meeting ------------------------------------------------------------------- Chairwoman Patrick called the meeting to order at 7:30 p.m. Roll Call Present: Bernald, Kaplan, Murakami, Patrick, Pierce, Siegfried Late: None Absent: Abshire Staff: Community Development Manager Walgren Minutes - July 9, 1997 COMMISSIONERS BERNALD/KAPLAN MOVED TO APPROVE THE JULY 9, 1997 MINUTES. THE MOTION CARRIED 5/0. SIEGFRIED ABSTAINED. ABSHIRE ABSENT. . Walgren noted that Page 5, paragraph 1 should read: "BY CONSENSUS, THE COMMISSION CONTINUED THE PUBLIC HEARING TO THE JULY 23, 1997 REGULAR ADJOURNED MEETING." Oral Crynem,n; cations No comments were offered. Report of Posting,~genda Pursuant to Government Code 54954.2, the agenda for this meeting was properly posted on July 18, 1997. Tec n~cal Corrections to Packet None CONSBrI'T rnT.~nAR PUBLIC HBARIAIGS 1. IIP-97-004 (APN 393-01-024, 393-01-025, 393-O1-026, 393-01-027, and 393-01-028) - 12850 SARATOGA-SIINI~ZYVALB ROAD (ARGONADT SHOPPING CBNTSR), STARBIICKS COFFSB COt; Request for Use Permit approval to allow a new restaurant/coffee shop in an existing 1,169 square foot tenant space, currently occupied by a travel agency, in the Argonaut Shopping Center. Twenty- ~~04~~ Planning Commission Minutes Page 2 August 13, 1997 four seats are proposed inside; no outdoor seating is proposed. The project also includes a Sign Permit. The property is zoned Neighborhood Commercial (CN). ----------------------------------------------------------- Community Development Manager Walgren sununarized the staff report indicating that based on the Center's established commercial use and with proper conditions placed on Starbucks, this request could be supported. Additional letters from the neighbors were distributed to the Commissioners. Chairwoman Patrick opened the public hearing at 7:40 p.m. Ed Storm, representing the applicant, stated that the proposed use was consistent with what is allowable and requested approval. Other speakers providing background for Starbucks included: .Ron Taylor, Paul Bosnian, and Linda Jonas and Panos Joulios from Los Altos. Neighbor, Chris Hawks, expressed concern due to increased traffic. Eric Morley, Saratoga businessman, welcomed Starbucks. Marguerite Fischer, resident, would be greatful for a clean establishment at Argonaut. COMMISSIONERS PIERCE/M~I MOVED TO CLOSE-THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 7:55 P.M. A summary of the Commissioners' important concerns is as follows: Commissioner Kaplan expressed dismay over a lack of cleanliness and over trash littered throughout the Argonaut Shopping Center. Wanted condition of maintenance if approved. Expressed interest in outdoor seating. Commissioner Murakami questioned whether another location within the Center would be feasible; spoke of traffic and trash issues. Commissioner Siegfried was concerned with square footage, hours of operation, placement of doors and deliveries. Also thought that pigeon droppings were a concern throughout the Center. Conrtnissioner Hernald addressed renovation of the Center, cleanliness and establishing a cleaning policy. Interested in outdoor seating. Conanissioner Pierce thought that Starbucks would be. an excellent addition to the Center, along with carrying out the upcoming renovation. Questioned the scope of cleanliness for which Starbucks would be responsible. ~~~®~`7 J Planning Commission Minutes August 13, 1997 Page 3 Chairwoman Patrick referred to possible trash-related problems with carryout, questioned the start of renovation and a conditional use permit to monitor unclean conditions. COMMISSIONERS BERNALD/SIEGFRIED MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION UP-97- 004 WITH TEMPORARY SIGNAGE AND SUBJECT TO THE SUBMITTAL OF A MAINTENANCE PROGRAM TO STAFF. MOTION CARRIED 6/0. ABSHIRE ABSENT. 2. DR-97-029 (APN 397-16-147) - PII~IId BROTBSRS, 14135 TAGS COi1RT (LOT 5); Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,785 sq. ft. two-story home at 26 ft. in height. The property is currently vacant. The applicant is requesting an exception to the height reduction for floor area. The site is 40,424 sq. ft. in size, and is in an R-1-40,000 zoning district. Walgren presented a staff report recommending approval of the project, commenting that if approved, 2 of the 3 lots in the development would then be developed. Chairwoman Patrick opened the public hearing at 8:27 p.m. Applicant, Chuck Bommarito, representing Pinn Brothers, summarized that he agreed with the staff report. Commissioner Replan questioned the driveway width and asked that Pinn Brothers commit to two gas fireplaces ,and two woodburning with gas starters. COMMISSIONERS RAPLAN/BFRNALD MOVED TO CLOSL"THE PUBLIC HEARING AT 8:40 P.M. Chair Patrick also expressed her concern .for the fireplace issue. COMMISSIONERS RAPLAN/BSRNALD MOVED TO APPROVE RESOLUTION DR-97-029 WITH THB CONDITION THAT TWO FIRBPLACBS BB GAS BURNING ONLY AND TWO BE.W69BB~ WITH GAS STARTERS. CARRIED 6/0. ABSHIRE ABSENT. 3. DR-97-014 (APN 397-16-145) - PIHI~i BROTI~RS, 14200 TAGS COURT (LOT 7); Request for Design Review approval to construct a new 5,860 sq, ft. one-story home at 22 ft. in height. The property is currently vacant. The site is 51,236 sq. ft. in size, and is in an R-1-40,000 zoning district... Walgren presented a staff report recommending approval of the project as design review findings could be made for support. He ,~ ~f ~. ;' ~~`~-~~$ RESOLUTION NO. UP-97-004.1 CITY OF SARATOGA PLANNING CONIlVIISSION STATE OF CALIFORNIA Star6ucks: 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road WHEREAS, the City of Sazatoga Planning Commission has received an application for a modification to a Use Permit approval to construct expand their restaurant from 1,160 square feet to 1,600 square feet and provide outdoor seating; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has conducted a duly noticed Public Hearing at which time all interested parties were given a full opportunity to be heazd and to present evidence; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the addition of four parking spaces is not necessary to accommodate the proposed outdoor seating, as outdoor seating is an encouraged use and will not have a significant impact on the available parking; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds: a. That the proposed restaurant is in accord with the objectives of the Saratoga General Plan and the Saratoga Zoning Ordinance and the purposes of the zoning district in which the site is located. b. That the proposed restaurant will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, nor materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity in that appropriate conditions have been placed on the project to minimize potential impacts. c. That the proposed restaurant will comply with all other applicable provisions of the Saratoga municipal code. NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Sazatoga does hereby resolve as follows: Section 1. After careful consideration of the site plan, architectural drawings, plans and other exhibits submitted in connection with this matter, the application of Stazbucks for Use Permit approval be and the same is hereby granted subject to the following conditions: 1. The Planning Commission shall retain continuing jurisdiction over the Use Permit and may, at any time, modify, delete or impose any new conditions of the permit to preserve the public health, safety, and welfare. 2. This Resolution shall supersede Resolution UP-97-004 dated July 23, 1997. 3. The coffee shop shall operate as proposed and as represented on the plans marked "Exhibit A." Any intensification of this use shall require an amended Use Permit and Planning Commission approval. 4. Prior to issuance of Building Permits for internal tenant improvements for the Starbucks, detailed construction plans shall be submitted to the Planning Division for Zoning Cleazance to verify consistency with the approved plans mazked Exhibit "A", and shall File No. UP-97.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road include the following: a. Four (4) sets of complete construction plans incorporating this Resolution as a separate plan page. b. The plans shall include a detailed sign plan indicating that the signage on the Blauer side benon-illuminated consistent with the approved sign program. 5. Prior to issuance of Zoning Clearance for the proposed tenant improvements, the owner/applicant shall do the following: a) Submit verification from the West Valley Sanitation District to the Community Development Department showing proof of compliance with the District's sanitary sewer permit requirement. Applicant shall contact Don Toy of the Sanitation District at (408) 378-2407. b) Submit verification from the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant to the Community Development Department showing proof of compliance of the proposed facility by the District's industrial waste inspector. The applicant shall submit a copy of the plans for approval to the District (San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant, 700 Los Esteros Road, S'an Jose, CA 95134. c) Submit verification from the Santa Clara County Health Department to the Community Development Department showing proof of compliance of the proposed facility with the Health Department's requirements: d) Submit a Maintenance Plan to the Planning Division staff for review and approval. Said Plan shall include provisions for frequent sweeping and litter pick up around the exterior of the premises, and shall be incorporated into the project file as "Exhibit" B. 6. The proposed use shall at all times operate in compliance with all regulations of the City and/or other agencies having jurisdictional authority over the use pertauung to, but not limited to, health, sanitation, safety, and water quality issues. 7. The establishment shall not be opened or operated in any form prior to 5:30 a.m. or after 11:00 p.m. on a daily basis. 8. Truck deliveries shall be scheduled during non-peak hours (i.e., not occur anytime during 7:30 to 8:30 a.m. on weekdays, and not during 9:00 to 11:00 a.m. on weekends.) 9. The applicant shall install and maintain an early warning fire system (Item A006 alarm system,) in accordance with the Saratoga Fire District. Said system shall have documentation relative to the proposed installation and shall be submitted to the Fire District for approval. File No. UP-97.1; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road 10. An approved National Fire Protection 13 Sprinkler System shall be maintained and approved by the Saratoga Fire District. Any modification shall be reviewed and approved by the District. 11. All building and construction related activities shall adhere to New Development and Construction -Best Management Practices as adopted by the City for the purpose of preventing storm water pollution. 12. Applicant agrees to hold City harmless from all costs and expenses, including attorney's fees, incurred by the City or held to be the liability of City in connection with City's defense of its actions in any proceeding brought in any State or Federal Court, challenging the City's action with respect to the applicant's project. 13. Noncompliance with any of the conditions of this permit shall constitute a violation of the permit. Because it is impossible to estimate damages the City could incur due to the violation, liquidated damages of $250 shall be payable to this City per each day of the violation. Section 2. Construction must be commenced within 24 months or approval will expire. Section 3. All applicable requirements of the State, County, City and other Governmental entities must be met. Section 4. Unless appealed pursuant to the requirements of Article 15-90 of the Saratoga City Code, this Resolution shall become effective fifteen (15) days from the date of adoption. PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City of Saratoga Planning Commission, State of California, this 28th day of April 1999 by the following roll call vote: AYES: Conanissioners Kaplan, Mura_kami, Page, Patriok and Pierce NOES: Chair Bernald ABSENT: Conanissioner Martlage Chair, Pl ing ommission ATTEST: l~l7alQoYl~-`- Secretary, Planning Commiss o p Date Received: Hearing Date: ~p ~ Fee: G ~ r Receipt No. ~~ APPEAL APPLICATION Name of Appellant : ~ ` ( ~~ S~P~~ K , yj~(~f~ Address: ~ 39y ~ ~~~ ~~/,(~~ Telephone: Z~Dg g ~~ D 3 3 ~ Name of Applicant (if different from Appellant) : S~(~C~ 5 ~D~`~~ Project File Number and Address : (,(P--9 ~-pp y, / / Z q ~c~ SA~Ara~.4- -~ ~yU'~L~- ~/ /, /~ ~~~ Decision Being Appealed: ~D,J~ j rj,Dr1J/f- ~ (~.~~. ~(~/GiH,~ ~ ~'D/~- ou-~~k~~wi~'•~ ~ ~ ~b Sro~ e x~~N 5 ~"~ ru.M.v~~ ~ . G~ro~unds for Appeal (letter may beL attached) : l J_ l„` C~ wt ws: Si O~ C Et..J ~ ~M~iYt ca •+ ~ Tl~ ~(IC (p,~J yu,.~1 T ~/ {+ C C , j~q i LL.b V ~ ~,~o~t.C.L ~ Nc~`~~fx~tlwo~ /'~i•P~rc,eQ%~l ov~wlG /~G2u.,`n~c•~.c.c.y~5 N~ l~a~y s; s o~~~e,f/~.' e /(~,',~~ e~ce~s a ~ 1~. l'~v~~s ~•~ s c~o,ve . /• ~i~.G Du-~G~oo2 s ~ ~; X14 l A N, . 5~ou- itOc~,e s~~ ,~G' ~u ~d yla~i¢r~ * ella s S gnatu *Please do not sign until application is presented at City offices. If you wish specific people to be notified of this appeal, please list them on a separate sheet. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA CA 95070, BY 5:00 P.M. WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE DECISION. File No. AUTHORIZATION FOR PUBLIC NOTICING I~ ~ !~i as appellant on the above file, hereby authorize Engi Bering Data Services to perform the legal-)noticing on the above file. _ j Date: ~ 3 ~ Signature: ~ ; ~l?L'~~`' CHRISTOPHER R. H~~WKS LIS.~ C. TR ~XLER June 10, 1999 Mayor Jim Shaw City Council of Saratoga Larry Perlin, City ~lanagex, City of Saratoga Subject: Appeal of the approval of conditional use permit for outdoor seating and store expansionjremodel for Starbucks (UP 97-004.1) Dear Sirs: In support of this appeal I would like to offer additional information. Our contention is that the Saratoga Planning Commission and Community Development office have failed to properl}' apply the CN zoning requirements with regard to the referenced property and the Conditional Use Permits granted. Both elements of the modification made to the Permit, store expansion and outdoor seating, would have a serious impact on the adjacent neighborhood. This impact was ignored and improperly discounted during the approval process. I will discuss the two requested changes separately and follow with additional items that I plan to touch on during the 6/16/99 Council meeting. First, the expanded/remodeled store design and its' impact on traffic and parking need to be considered. The revised layout of the store will materially affect the traffic flow through the center causing an unsafe condition at the exit east of the center on Blauer Drive (see diagram and note on attachment B-1). Our contention is that the majority of parking will occur to the south of the store (see discussion below for reasoning). This section of the parking is one-way to the east, and the exit from the center here is blind. This will cause a significant safety risk especially during the busy morning hours, both fox the neighborhood car traffic and for Starbucks. The prospect of literally hundreds of cars passing within thirty feet of the closest neighbor should also be considered intolerable. I have attached a portion of the drawing that I will reference here, labeled .-1-1 (expanded store layout) and -2 (`original' store layout}. <'~ quick glance should suffice to show that the door that is persistently called a `side' door (south door) will in fact be the main door used. It is closer to the counter and closer to the vast majority of the readily accessible parking. The parking situation is shown in another attachment (labeled B-1), where the 15 spaces near the south door compare to the 4 (6 including handicapped) spaces a comparable distance from the counter near the west door. Starbucks representatives and the planning staff still maintain that the majority of customers will come in the west door, but I fail to see how that could be considered likely. It is particularly important here, as it is central to the concern we have expressed repeatedly regarding the traffic and parking. Secondly, the addition of outdoor seating to the planned store is a tremendously negative revision to the agreed upon development. ~1t the original meeting where the Use Permit was granted, the Starbucks representatives told the neighbors that they would drop the request for this seating due to the overwhelmingly negative sentiment we expressed. This was certainly a factor in our decision not to appeal that Permit. This later reverse on their part shows extremely bad faith. The remodeled argonaut Center has plenty of area for outdoor seating near the center of the development, and this should be used if the community has a need for a gathering place here. The Community Development staff has shown its extreme indifference to the concerns of the neighbors by endorsing this change and ignoring or downplaying any negative aspect. The staff report dismissed our 20390 BLr1UER DRIVE • SARATOGA, CA 95070 PHONE: (408) 868-0337 EMAIL: CRHA\\'KS@YAHOO.COAi - 2 - June 10, 1999 concerns about the proximity of the seating area, although the distance from the proposed seating to the neighborhood is less than the distance between neighbors in most of Saratoga! According to the staff (and repeated by the Commission) the noise will be constrained by the location under the overhanging facade. This might be true if the people using this area remained seated at all times, and the tables were never filled up. Please take a moment to reflect on the situation at similar shops such as the Coffee Society at the Oaks Center in Cupertino, where loitering is common. To the complete dismay of the neighbors, Commissioners suggested that having this area fora `hang-out' for youth could be a good thing. Again I refer you to the Coffee Society, where guards had to be hired, and mature customers felt intimidated away from the entire center. The trash problem, which has been a repeated issue at this center, will be magnified immensely by this change. In addition to these two major issues, several additional items require discussion: 1. The lack of parking close to the new main entrance store will cause parking on the street further damaging our neighborhood. 2. The traffic through the neighborhood will increase significantly as customers find the}- can avoid several streetlights by cutting through from Cox or exiting via Cox. 3. The original Argonaut Center plan noted that by statute there should be more parking than is currently available, but argued that since there was a mix of uses it wouldn't be a problem. With each change, Staff has simply said it isn't a problem. 4. This process has become a series of incremental changes, each detrimental to the neighborhood. Apparently, even the Planning Commission has no idea of the overall tenant plan for this development. The neighbors certainly wonder what else will be allowed in the remaining spaces. 5. Signage is an issue. Planning Staff had included it in the report (with no request by Starbucks). We now have approved signs higher than the CN zoning indicates the entire building should have been. These signs are also, if the landscaping is done per plan, visible only to the neighbors. 6. The plan for :Median development has been changed without notification of the neighbors. While this is not strictly a Starbucks issue, I came across it while researching this appeal, and I would like an opinion from the City council regarding this. At some point, enough is enough. The neighborhood has been ignored, their concerns dismissed, and commitments broken. I was recently asked if there could be an acceptable compromise. After much reflection, I have to say that the original Conditional Use Permit for Starbucks was compromise enough. No additional changes should be allowed. The neighbors believe that a less aggressive use of the site neat the neighborhood is appropriate and reasonable, and that the original site for a coffee shop (see attachment C-1) is a much better choice for this intense sort of operation. Please consider the entire situation in your review of this information, starting from the beginning of the Center redesign, proceeding to the unknown future. The neighbors have been asked to accept 35' tall buildings in a zoning area where the max should be 20'. ~Yre have had mature landscaping replaced with tress which will require decades for full growth. The parking in the center has been severely reduced, while more and more intense uses have been added. No plan for tenants has been presented, creating a sense of looming uncertainty. We are now on a third round of hearings for the center, with no end in sight. Please listen to your constituents with at least the same level of concern as has been given to the commercial interests in this case. Thank you for your attention to this issue, which is of such importance to the residents of this neighborhood. Sincerely, Christopher R. Hawks Lisa C. Traxler ~y,~, G ~,,+.w~r~. /N, _.( ` , _ ~l '1' ~~ t~_ - ~ .;. ~~.~ ~~ ~,~ ~<<,~ ~, ~" ~ ~~ v~ ;_~ ~. ~ -~ i ~~~-. ~= ,_:,~~ ~~ `~ N -~~ ~r~ d .~ ~ ~~~ =' ~ , ~. . , ~'' n ,~~ i~- T~ ,. .,, .~ .~ ~' `~~... i~~~'- :; :. ~' ~' ~ ~, ~~~ I -. ,z +~~~ ~~~- ..~ Cows' +~ ~... ~ ~~~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ , ~ 5 ~~~ ~ ,t,b ~~ ~~ o ~T I L~~ _ ~` / ~ ~. 0 ~~ \~ e~ ~~ ~. s ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~; ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ~~ ;; ~. ~; ~, ~; ~, >> ;~ ~, ~~~r, ~*o,~- (0~~~~~r~A~ q~~T ~ ~ow~tc~L 11 '~~ 1~R~ ~ ~ rw ~/ ' b ~'~~"" tSH '~~~ ~~~ ~ ..(N~ ~ `~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 1 ~ 1 ~ ~" ~~ ; soy ~ Q~e~ i\ ~~ ~;, q~c~ ~ ! /~ ~ ,1_ . . ~ ti~ ~E~ ~~~.8~~5 ,~ ~ .~ ~ i~ t=~'"~~ _,. r _. ~ ~ r t i ~. ~{y ~ 1 r Nom.-- J ~ t ` ~~ `~ W T1 ~~ ___. r, L ~~. _ ~ ~, __1 i /~ r r,,,,,, 4- _ 1 . ~ ~ `r-~~ ~b " ~ ~ _. ~,~ ~~ ~,. :.."-~ ~1 '~" 3 '' 4 ~` ~ ~5 d L~ C~ ~ _ ~~C. .... «-,' ~~. ~~~ T~ p~-~~c ~ r. . ,. ~,~. , ow~r~- Nm ^LJ_ ~~ ~,~'~` ~~ ` ~ ~ n ~ 1 1 ~ ~~ .~ ~ ~ ~~ i '~ '`""f'_ ~ 1 rr i i j ! ' ~~ i I ~ ~ I =-;--~ 1 1~; ~ I -I © ~ .,~ ~ N W i - ' + i ~ - ~ i t N: ~ ~~ - N~'i.. r-~-- _~ ~ " . _ i~ ~~ - ~- ~ _ :~~ ~ .~i s er . -. ~ - -- ,~ ~ ~~ - " 4 r----, ~ f-----, ~..~ ~L ,. N ~ _ ~' ~ ~. 1 ~ % ----. T ~. -'~ v . cc ~~;j=~j~' ~ ~ `4~' ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Y ~ ~ 1~ K 1'' 1 ~~..~ _+ --T ~ % / ~/ j , /',. ~ ~/ . ~/ / ~ ,r J r~ June 8, 1999 "1r. Larry Perlin City "Tanager and The Saratoga City Council 13 "r 77 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca 95070 RE: Argonaut Shopping Center Starbuck's Coffee Dear Sir and Council: I am a resident directly° behind the Argonaut Shopping Center cn Regan Lane and I have beer: fighting the consequences of having irresponsible owners of this same shopping center sir:ce c.e mop-ed here in 1960. we were sold this property with the premise that. it was a residential area. We have battled garbage, rats and disreputable conditions ever since. That is why I am truly concerned that we are, once again, being duped into believing that any- so-called improvement will be that. I'ou can understand why' I have that feeling. I do riot want peojole parking' at all times of the morning and night in front of my- property lealiing oil and using my property front for their own personal use.. T-'tzer~ is, also, a concerrz for t:he noise caused by> t.r,is. If you can assure me that these conditions will not exist and that the parking is adequate in the shopping c•er.ter itself, trash rill. be cor?tained properly- and not allowed to blow all o-.-er the neighborhood behind, the hours trill be reasonable and noise abatement Trill occur I will be more amenable t.o this addition to th~~ corner. Tlianl~ you for ~~ou care in looking into this matter before it becomes insolvable. `Irs . ^largaret B . Townsf~/~j,~9/ 13035 Regan Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 4080-86-r'-9786 FILE: AR.GSHOP it ~ J tJ`N~.,O June 8, 1999 Mr. Larry Perlin City Manager and The Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 9570 Argonaut Shopping Center Starbuck's Coffee Dear Sir and Council I would like to bring to your attention how your and the City Council's decision as to the location of "Starbucks" at the Argonaut Shopping Center will affect me personally. My house is located at the corner of Blauer Drive and Regan Lane. From my kitchen- and dinett window, I have full view of the inter- section and Blauer Drive leading to the shopping center. Since the new parking facilities around "Starbucks" are very limited (this very limited parking space will also serve Citibank and Long's Drugstore plus some yet unknown shops to be moved in on the corner of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and Blauer), cars will inevitably be parked along Blauer Drive, as well as on Regan. As the past has shown, my house, in particular, lends itself to safe and convenient parking for three distinct reasons, 1. The street front of my house (Regan Lane) has a wide shoulder. 2. The parking space is located around the bend off Blauer and does not obstruct the immediate traffic area. 3. The location is in close proximity to "Starbucks". My great concern is that due to the limited parking facilities at "Starbucks" I will find myself having to look at parked cars in front of my home on a daily basis. When my late husband and I chose -2- - 2 - our home 20 years ago. it was for the lovely green surroundings and the limited amount of traffic. So far we have been happy and proud homeowners. Increased traffic and immediate parked cars in front of my home, as well as on Blauer Drive will be of no enjoyment but of great aggravation aside from a very distinct possibility of lowering the value of my home. Mrs. Jutta M. Jacobs 12990 Regan bane Saratoga, CA 95070 T: (408) 867-5181 F II,E i ARGSHOP ec~ ~ Jam ~° ~a ~®g~no®ac~n ~~ay ~og~,aao~ac~ ~®~9~ ~1~~~~ ~~®~ ~~rm~oga, ~~ 9~®7® ~~~-~~~9 June 9, 1999 Larry Perlin, City Manager and City Council of Saratoga City Hall Saratoga, CA Subject: Starbucks/Argonaut Shopping Center June 16, 1999 Agenda We, living in the first house adjacent to the Argonaut Shopping Center, are opposed to the location of Starbucks for the following reasons: 1. Hours of operation 2. Traffic 3. Lack of adequate parking 4. Noise 5. Trash 6. Outdoor seating While we cannot dictate what an owner/developer can put on his property, we ask that the city set a goal of limiting the negative impact on the neighborhood. We ask that Starbucks be located elsewhere, such as adjacent to Safeway, which is open 24 hours. Hours of Operation are 5:30AM to 11 PM. Traffic on Highway 9 begins around 4:30AM; autos will begin lining up waiting for the shop to open to get their coffee; the evenings are expected to be busy until 11. That means the doors will close at 11, but the patrons likely will linger. One would reasonably expect that there will be a period of cleaning up, deliveries made and preparation for the following day, all of which makes it a 24-hour operation. The residents expect the business will generate more noise and traffic which will further impair the tranquility of the neighborhood. The shopping center provides enough of that as it is. Tr ffic. Cars traveling west on Cox Avenue will drive down Regan Lane to Blauer Drive and into the shopping center rather than go through three stop lights: Cox Avenue, Pierce Road, .Blauer Drive. This is happening presently, but with intense commercial use will produce a greater number of cars. A traffic impact study has not been made. To minimize the use of residential streets to access the shopping center, some type of restraint should be installed to discourage entry into the neighborhood at both, the entrance onto Regan Lane from Cox Avenue and at the Blauer Drive entrance into the neighborhood through to Cox Avenue. It does not take much imagination to know that Starbucks will invite more traffic into our neighborhood than if housed in a central location off of Highway 9. In addition, very little space has been allocated for Starbucks parking. Patrons wi11 seek to park closer, which means Blauer Drive. The businesses on the south side in the former Argonaut Shopping Center were "neighborhood friendly": beauty shop, barber shop, shoemaker, bal{et studio, and a travel agency which closed at 5PM and Saturday and Sunday. Less intense commercial uses are usually located adjacent to residences. Starbucks is an intense commercial operation. We respectfully request that you make a site visit so that the city, developer and the neighbors can come to an amicable solution. Respectfully.~submitte , J ~ ~9 ... ~~ _ %~ li ~ogdanovich Mary gd nov' ..., ., ~ . v o F, 12897 Regan Ln Saratoga, CA 95070 June 10, 1999 rcosa Loayza City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 868-1240 /Fax (408) 868-1280 408-741-2243 Re: Use Permits for Starbucks, Jamba Juice, etc. in the Argonaut Shopping Center, 12960 & 12868 Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga, CA Dear City Councd Members, ~( . I would like to voice my concerns regarding the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (UP 97-044.1) for Starbucks and a Use Permit approval for Jamba Juice (UP 99-008, 393-01-041). Any extra traffic on Regan Lane or in the back alley is not acceptable. If the traffic could be directed for the cars to exit onto Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road ~, it would probably be okay. I have major concerns with trash, including broken bottles, and people hanging around in the back alley. This has become a dumping ground lately. This is not acceptable. The traffic has increased tremendously and after the construction is finished I don't want the traffic to be a hazard to the kids, elderly, residents and pets of this neighborhood. The back alley must have some speed bumps to prevent drivers from speeding. The bottom line is to restrict the commercial zone to the commercial streets only and to stop the traffic resulting from the clients of Starbucks, Jamba Juice, etc. from circling our neighborhood. Sincerely, Rosa Loayza, Owner & Resident ofAPN: 393-01-018 p. 1 ~~ P.S. The cost of keeping our backyards clean is double due to the intense amounts of dust from the construction. .,un to ~~ u4:b5p Rosa Loayza 408-741-2243 p,z cc : ,~-~ 12933 Regan Ln Saratoga, CA 95070 June 10, 1999 City of Saratoga 13777 Fruitvale Ave Saratoga, CA 95070 (408) 868-1240 /Fax (408) 868-1280 Re: Use Permits for Starbucks, Jamba Juice, etc. in the Argonaut Shopping Center, 12960 & 12868 Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road, Saratoga, CA Dear City Council Members, I would like to voice my concerns regarding the approval of a Conditional Use Permit (UP 97-044.1) for Starbucks and a Use Pert approval for Jamba Juice (UP 99-008, 393-01-041). Any extra traffic on Regan Lane or in the back alley is not acceptable. Ifthe traffic could be directed for the cars to exit onto Saratoga/Sunnyvale Road Q~ly, it would probably be okay. I have major concerns with trash, including broken bottles, and people hanging around in the back alley. This has become a dumping ground lately. This is not acceptable. The traffic has increased tremendously and after the construction is finished I don't want the traffic to be a hazard to the kids, elderly, residents and pets of this neighborhood. The back alley mast have some speed bumps to prevent drivers from speeding. The bottom line is to restrict the commercial zone to the commercial streets only and to stop the traffic resuhang from the cfients of Starbucks, Jamba Juice, etc. from circling our neighborhood. Sincerely, Mike Suyn~g Kook Lee ~ f ~~~ ~`` C~B~~ o~ ~'2~00 G~L~ 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE • SARATOGA, CALIFORNIA 95070 • (408) 868-1200 Incorporated October 22, 1956 May 17, 1999 Christopher R. Hawks 20390 Blauer Drive Saratoga, CA 95070 COUNCIL MEMBERS: Evan Baker Stan Bogosian John Mehaffey Jim Shaw Nick Streit SUBJECT: APPEAL OF THE APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR OUTDOOR SEATING AND STORE EXPANSION/REMODEL FOR STARBUCKS (UP 97-004.1) Dear Mr. Hawks: This letter will confirm receipt of your appeal of the approval of a conditional use permit for outdoor seating and store expansion/remodel for Starbucks located at 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road, along with your check in amount of $250.00 covering the appeal fee, on May 13, 1999. According to Section 15-90-070 of the Municipal Code, the City Clerk shall schedule the matter for hearing within thirty days after the date on which the notice of appeal is filed or at the next available regular meeting of the City Council which would be the regular meeting of June 16, 1999 at 7:30 p.m. in the Council Chambers/Civic Theater located at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, to allow public notification as required by law. If you wish to request a continuance, you may do so without charge. Any subsequent requests for continuance must be accompanied by a fee of $340.00. 2 a~ .oa The deadline for submitting any additional materials for the Council agenda packet on your appeal is Thursday, June 10, 1999. If you wish to submit written documents after that day, please provide ten copies of each document to the City Clerk no later than noon the following day. Please be advised that the City Council will allow ten (10) minutes for your presentation on this appeal. The hearing is "de novo", which means that any relevant issue for or against your appeal may be considered, whether or not it was considered by the Planning Commission and regardless of whether the Planning Commission approved the application. If you have technical questions about your project, please contact Heather Bradley in the Planning Department at 868-1230. If you have questions about the process, you may contact me at 868-1269. Sincerely, ~k'l~G( ~. QS?~'Yvr~-~ `~usan A. Ramos, MC City Clerk cc: Heather Bradley, Planning Department Printed on recycled paper. Date Received: Hearing Date : ~p ~/(pl~'J Fee: ~zJ (! r- Receipt No.: ~~ APPEAL APPLICATION Name of Appellant : ~ ~ ( ~/ST~~/~~. ~, ,~/j~-(,J~ Address : ~ ~ 9y ~ (~/iC ~ ~~/~(~~ Telephone : Z~pg t ~~ D 3 7 Name of Applicant (if different from Appellant) :~%'79~Z$(,~C,L 5 / D~~,~,~ Project File Number and Address : (,,(.~ -9 ?-pc9y, / / Z 9 (~O S,gyL, 4saG~- -~ ~cvv1~U~¢.L.C, Decision Being Appealed: ~p,J~ j ~ / / j`DNiQ- / l~-5L 1 ~(~t-~ T /' fLo~4l~ f~Orc-- Grounds for Appeal (letter may be attached): r`' G~ w. ao: Si o.J ~ ~.n1 ~ ~1ti1 /y~. a ~ ~~~Z, ~-c.(/G LoD ku.nJ f " 0~ C ~ ~ t`"rV ~ C-ifb P~ ~n~o~t-CL ~ ~ /~c.~`~ti. Fx~2./ioo/~ ~i~rrtsiu. ~2~ ~~ ~ ~ o~ui.~ G i~-G~c.~ x.~yu.r..J7~5 ,r N ~ f~a~tis; s o~~~z,~,' /~..1~,'~~ e~ee~'s a~ ~u l'`w~6~s ~•ts a~o•ve ,./ i• ' / i~.L Ou-~Gtoo2 S C./~ ~: ~J L l A N 7 5~,u- ~t,pcue 5~ ,~' c~o~~d~~~~iG~~ * ella s S gnatur *Please do not sign until application is presented at City offices. If you wish specific people to be notified of this appeal, please list them on a separate sheet. THIS APPLICATION MUST BE SUBMITTED TO THE CITY CLERK, 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE, SARATOGA CA 95070, BY 5:00 P.M. WITHIN FIFTEEN (15) CALENDAR DAYS OF THE DATE OF THE DECISION. File No. AUTHORIZATION FOR PUBLIC NOTICING I, !73 GCS as appellant on the above file, hereby authorize Engi Bering Data Services to perform the legal noticing on the above file. Date: ~ 3 ~ signature: OFFICIAL RECEIPT DATE: ` CITY OF SARATOGA 13777 FRUITVALE AVENUE SARATOGA, CA 95070 PHONE: (408) 868-1200 FAX: (408) 868-1280 ~ / RECEIVED FROM: ~/~~q_ ~ ~- /~ ~ ©~, a d ~ v~~ ANIMAL LICENSES 001-2025-421-Ot-00 $ MAPS/XEROX 001-1040-47301-00 $ ARBORIST FEE 250-4010-444.02-00 PARK RENTAL 292-6020.462-0302 BVILDINGPERMITS 50-4015-422-01-00 PROPERTY TAXES/SECURED 001-1040-411-01-00 BUILDING RENTAL 292-6020-462.0301 PLANNING FEES 250.4010-444-01.00 BUS TICKETS 001-0000-202-10.01 REFUNDABLE DEP/ BONDS 800.0000-260.10.00 BUSINESS LICENSE TAX 001-1040-413.05-00 RENTAL DEPOSIT 292-0000-260-00-00 DOCUMENT STORAGE FEES 250-4010-444-05.00 SALES TAX 001-1040-412-Ot-00 DOCUMENT TRANSFER TAX 001.1040-41301-00 THEATER SURCHARGE 2936005-462-03.03 DONATIONS-RECREATION 90-6010-471-01-00 TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY 001-1040-413-0300 ENCROACHMENT PERMITS 001-3035-422.0300 WIRELESS COMM. LEASE 001-1040-462-01-00 ENGINEERING FEES 250-3035-44302-00 ENVIRONMENTAL FEES 260.5005-444-0300 FALSE ALARM FEES ~1-1040-451-01-00 FINES & FORFEITS 001-1040.452-01-00 FOOD SALE/RECREATION 290-~05-445.06.00 FOOD SALElTEEN SERVICES 290.6010-445-08-00 FRANCHISE FEES 001-1040.41304-00 EOIOGY FEE 250-3035-443.01-00 RADING PERMITS 250.4015.422-02-00 - INTEREST 001-1040.461-Ot-00 OTHER ~ APPI./PERMIT NO. T RECEIVED BYIDEPT.: FORM OF PAYMENT: CASH CNECK NO. DEPOSIT N RECEIPT # y UP-97-004.1 (393-01-024, -025, -026, -027, -028, & 393-02-003) - STARBUCKS; 12960 Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road. Request for modification to the existing Use Permit for an 1,160 sq. ft. space by expanding the restaurant into an additional 440 sq. ft. of the existing Argonaut Center. The modification request would also allow outdoor seating without additional parking spaces. The property is located within the Commercial Neighborhood zoning district. ~~ ~ ,. Gv -.e ~I.~~~~~ ~G-ocl~ 9 y ~ ~i ~7L NOTE TO SARATOGA NEWS: THIS IS A LEGAL AD. Please typeset text and photograph seal, which Parker Stokes has, centered above it. Any questions should be directed to Susan at 868- 1269. This is Ad CC 444 .(Publish Saratoga News 5/19/99) '- NOTICE OF HEARING BEFORE CITY COUNCIL Notice is hereby given that the City Clerk of the Saratoga City Council, State of California, has set Wednesday, the 2nd day of June, at 7:30 p.m. (or earlier if public hearings are reached before 7:30 p.m. on the agenda) in the City Council Chambers at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga, California, as the time and place for public hearings on: A. Appeal of a condition placed upon the approval of a Tentative Parcel Map requiring the property to be divided evenly down the middle as opposed to the applicant's desire to create two unequal lots sized 29,507 and 12,735 square feet located at 20520 Verde Vista Lane. The property is located in an R-1-12,500 zoning district. (SD 99-001) (APN 503- 20-061) (Applicant/appellant, Wang and TS Civil Engineering Inc.) B. Appeal of Planing Commission denial of a request for modification of an approved Design Review application to allow the door of the detached garage to face the alley-~ located at 20385 Park Place. The property is located in an zoning C,~? ~ district. (DR 97-027.1) (APN 397-22-030) (Applicant/appellant, Harkey) ~~ 1_ ~ , ~, ". a_ r1 .Lc ter-- ' ~-S =' c i ".:_ c { , ~ ".~ r r << .. --~'- CY~/ C. .Reselu#aon-of the Gity-~nsil~fo~€~;~tega-a~opt~g~~udg~tfor Fiscal Year 1999-2000 and 2000-2001. D. Resolution of me tion to order the levy and collecti of Assessments pursuant to the Landscaping and L~ghtin~.Act of 72, City .of Sarato s 'ng`and Lig - ~District LLA-1, Fiscalear 1999-2000. ee"separate ad for full text of this resolution.) All interested persons may appear and be heard at the above time and place. If you challenge the subject projects in court, you maybe limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. In order to be included in the City Council's information packets, written communications should be filed on or before the Thursday before the meeting. A copy of any material provided to the City Council on the above hearing(s) is on file at the Office of the Saratoga City Clerk at 13777 Fruitvale Avenue, Saratoga. Questions may be addressed to the City Clerk, 868-1269. /s/Susan A. Ramos City Clerk T/~q vLrf ~f.iv.. ~{z/c~ ~~ ~~1t~.Q.4 ' June 8, 1999 Mr. Larry Perlin City Manager and The Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, CA 95070 Argonaut Shopping Center Starbuck's Coffee Dear Sir and Council I would like to bring to your attention how your and the City Council's decision as to the location of "Starbucks" at the Argonaut Shopping Center will affect me personally. My house is located at the corner of Blauer Drive and Regan Lane. From my kitchen- and dinett window, I have full view of the inter- section and Blauer Drive leading to the shopping center. Since the new parking facilities around "Starbucks" are very limited (this very limited parking space will also serve Citibank and Longs Drugstore plus some yet unknown shops to be moved in on the corner of Saratoga-Sunnyvale Road and ~3lauer), cars will inevitably be parked along Blauer Drive, as well as on Regan. As the past has shown, my house, in particular, lends itself to safe and convenient parking for three distinct reasons, 1. The street front of my house (Regan Lane) has a wide shoulder. 2. The parking space is located around the bend off Blauer and does not obstruct the immediate traffic area. 3. The location is in close proximity to "Starbucks". My great concern is that due to the limited parking facilities at "Starbucks" I will find myself having to look at parked cars in front of my home on a daily basis. When my late husband and I chose -2- N - ~ - our home 2Q years ago, it was for the lovely green surroundings and the limited amount of traffic. 5o far we have been happy and proud homeowners. Increased traffic and immediate parked cars in front of my home, as well as on Blauer Drive will be of no enjoyment but of great aggravation aside from a very distinct possibility of lowering the value of my home. Mrs. Jutta M. Jacobs 12990 Megan Lane Saratoga, CA 95cj70 T: (408) 86~-5181 FILET ARGSHOP cr ° ,la~w.c~ ]Eflg ]~®~~~,~®~~1~ ~®~9ll ~ll~~~~ ~~n~~ ~~~-~~~9 June 9, 1999 Larry Perlin, City Manager and City Council of Saratoga City Hall Saratoga, GA Subject: Starbucks/Argonaut Shopping Center June 16, 1999 Agenda We, living in the first house adjacent to the Argonaut Shopping Center, are opposed to the location of Starbucks for the following reasons: 1. Hours of operation 2. Traffic 3. Lack of adequate parking 4. Noise 5. Trash 6. Outdoor seating While we cannot dictate what an owner/developer can put on his property, we ask that the city set a goal of limiting the negative impact on the neighborhood. We ask that Starbucks be located elsewhere, such as adjacent to Safeway, which is open 24 hours. Hours of Operation are 5:30AM to 11 PM. Traffic on Highway 9 begins around 4:30AM; autos will begin lining up waiting for the shop to open to get their coffee; the evenings are expected to be busy until 11. That means the doors will close at 11, but the patrons likely will linger. One would reasonably expect that there will be a period of cleaning up, deliveries made and preparation for the following day, all of which makes it a 24-hour operation. The residents expect the business will generate more noise and traffic which will further impair the tranquility of the neighborhood. The shopping center provides enough of that as it is. Tr ffic. Cars traveling west on Cox Avenue will drive down Regan Lane to Blauer Drive and into the shopping center rather than go through three stop lights: Cox Avenue, Pierce Road, Blauer Drive. This is happening presently, but with intense commercial use will produce a greater number of cars. A traffic impact study has not been made. To minimize the use of residential streets to access the shopping center, some type of restraint should be installed to discourage entry into the neighborhood at both, the entrance onto Regan Lane from Cox Avenue and at the Blauer Drive entrance into the neighborhood through to Cox Avenue. It does not take much imagination to know that Starbucks will invite more traffic into our neighborhood than if housed in a central location off of Highway 9. In addition, very little space has been allocated for Starbucks parking. Patrons will seek to park closer, which means Blauer Drive. The businesses on the south side in the former Argonaut Shopping Center were "neighborhood friendly": beauty shop, barber shop, shoemaker, ballet studio, and a travel agency which closed at 5PM and Saturday and Sunday. Less intense commercial uses are usually located adjacent to residences. Starbucks is an intense commercial operation. We respectfully request that you make a site visit so that the city, developer and the neighbors can come to an amicable solution. Respectfully submitte , li ogdanovich Mary gd nov" June 8, 1999 Mr. Larry Perlin City Manager and The Saratoga City Council 13777 Fruitvale Avenue Saratoga, Ca 95070 RE: Argonaut Shopping Center Starbuck's Coffee Dear Sir and Council: I am a resident directly behind the Argonaut Shopping Center on Regan Lane and I have been figh;:ing the consequences of having irresponsible owners of this same shopping center since we moved here in 1960. We were sold this property with the premise that it was a residential area. We have battled garbage, rats and disreputable conditions ever since. That is why I am truly concerned that we are, once again, being duped into believing that any so-called improvement will be that. You can understand why I have that feeling. I do not want people parking at all times of the morning and night in front of my property leaking oil and using my property front for their own personal use. There is, also, a concern for the noise caused by this. If you can assure me that these conditions will not exist and that the parking is adequate in the shopping center itself, trash will be contained properly and not allowed to blew all over the neighborho od behind, the hours will be reasonable and no ise abatement will occu r I wi ll be mo~~e amenable to this addition to the' corner . Thank you for you care in looking into this matter before it becomes insolvable. Mrs . 'Margaret B . Towns fI~J,~~ 13035 Regan Lane Saratoga, CA 95070 4080-867-9786 FILE: ARGSHOP CG ; L~~~/YiCI~D CHRISTOPHER R. HAWKS LISA C. TRAXLER June 10, 1999 Mayor Jim Shaw City Council of Saratoga Larry Perlin, City Manager, City of Saratoga Subject: Appeal of the approval of conditional use permit for outdoor seating and store expansion/remodel for Starbucks (UP 97-004.1) Dear Sirs: In support of this appeal I would like to offer additional information. Our contention is that the Saratoga Plannuig Commission and Community Development office have failed to properly apply the CN zoning requirements with regard to the referenced property and the Conditional Use Permits granted. Both elements of the modification made to the Permit, store expansion and outdoor seating, would have a serious impact on the adjacent neighborhood. This impact was ignored and improperly discounted during the approval process. I will discuss the two requested changes separately and follow with additional items that I plan to touch on during the 6/16/99 Council meeting. First, the expanded/remodeled store design and its' impact on traffic and parking need to be considered. The revised layout of the store will materially affect the traffic flow through the center causing an unsafe condition at the exit east of the center on Blauer Drive (see diagram and note on attachment B-1). Our contention is that the majority of parking will occur to the south of the store (see discussion below for reasoning). This section of the parking is one-way to the east, and the exit from the center here is blind. This will cause a significant safety risk especially during the busy morning hours, both for the neighborhood car traffic and fox Starbucks. The prospect of literally hundreds of cars passing within thirty feet of the closest neighbor should also be considered intolerable. I have attached a portion of the drawing that I will reference here, labeled A-1 (expanded store layout) and A-2 (`original' store layout). A quick glance should suffice to show that the door that is persistently called a `side' door (south door) will in fact be the main door used. It is closer to the counter and closer to the vast majority of the readily accessible parking. The parking situation is shown in another attachment (labeled B-1), where the 15 spaces near the south door compare to the 4 (6 including handicapped) spaces a comparable distance from the counter near the west door. Starbucks representatives and the plamung staff still maintain that the majority of customers will come in the west door, but I fail to see how that could be considered likely. It is particularly important here, as it is central to the concern we have expressed repeatedly regarding the traffic and parking. Secondly, the addition of outdoor seating to the planned store is a tremendously negative revision to the agreed upon development. At the original meeting where the Use Permit was granted, the Starbucks representatives told the neighbors that they would drop the request for this seating due to the overwhelmingly negative sentiment we expressed. This was certainly a factor in our decision not to appeal that Permit. This later reverse on their part shows extremely bad faith. The remodeled Argonaut Center has plenty of area for outdoor seating near the center of the development, and this should be used if the community has a need for a gathering place here. The Community Development staff has shown its extreme indifference to the concerns of the neighbors by endorsing this change and ignoring or downplaying any negative aspect. The staff report dismissed our 20390 BLAUER DRIVE SARATOGA, CA 95070 PHONE: (408) 868-U337 EMAIL: CRHA~C'KS@YAHOO.COM _ 2 _ June 10, 1999 concerns about the proximity of the seating area, although the distance from the proposed seating to the neighborhood is less than the distance between neighbors in most of Saratoga! According to the staff (and repeated by the Commission) the noise will be constrained by the location under the overhanging facade. This might be true if the people using this area remained seated at all times, and the tables were never filled up. Please take a moment to reflect on the situation at similar shops such as the Coffee Society at the Oaks Center in Cupertino, where loitering is common. To the complete dismay of the neighbors, Commissioners suggested that having this area fora `hang-out' for youth could be a good thing. Again I refer you to the Coffee Society, where guards had to be hired, and mature customers felt intimidated away from the entire center. The trash problem, which has been a repeated issue at this center, will be magnified immensely by this change. In addition to these two major issues, several additional items require discussion: 1. The lack of parking close to the new main entrance store will cause parking on the street further damaging our neighborhood. 2. The traffic through the neighborhood will increase significantly as customers find they can avoid several streetlights by cutting through from Cox or exiting via Cox. 3. The original Argonaut Center plan noted that by statute there should be more parking than is currently available, but argued that since there was a mix of uses it wouldn't be a problem. With each change, Staff has simply said it isn't a problem. 4. This process has become a series of incremental changes, each detrimental to the neighborhood. Apparently, even the Planning Commission has no idea of the overall tenant plan for this development. The neighbors certainly wonder what else will be allowed in the remaining spaces. 5. Signage is an issue. Planning Staff had included it in the report (with no request by Starbucks). We now have approved signs higher than the CN zoning indicates the entire building should have been. These signs are also, if the landscaping is done per plan, visible only to the neighbors. 6. The plan for Median development has been changed without notification of the neighbors. While this is not strictly a Starbucks issue, I came across it while researching this appeal, and I would like an opinion from the City council regarding this. At some point, enough is enough. The neighborhood has been ignored, their concerns dismissed, and commitments broken. I was recently asked if there could be an acceptable compromise. After much reflection, I have to say that the original Conditional Use Permit for Starbucks was compromise enough. No additional changes should be allowed. The neighbors believe that a less aggressive use of the site near the neighborhood is appropriate and reasonable, and that the original site for a coffee shop (see attachment C-1) is a much better choice for this intense sort of operation. Please consider the entire situation in your review of this information, starting from the begiruung of the Center redesign, proceeding to the unknown future. The neighbors have been asked to accept 35' tall buildings in a zoning area where the max should be 20'. We have had mature landscaping replaced with tress which will require decades for full growth. The parking in the center has been severely reduced, while more and more intense uses have been added. No plan for tenants has been presented, creating a sense of looming uncertainty. We are now on a third round of hearings for the center, with no end in sight. Please listen to your constituents with at least the same level of concern as has been given to the commercial interests in this case. Thank you for your attention to this issue, which is of such importance to the residents of this neighborhood. Sincerely, Christopher R. Hawks ~ ~~ (/~ Lisa C. Traxler ~,~,,, G 'CT'-~`"T'""~.' I~,oR~~ ~:. (J ~.) U~ r, ~~ 0 ~' ~ ~? -~ A~,~. :~ .~ o,~~,-~.cR= g y~~ ~~~ /~ 0 ~~ N ~' ~-_ ~ ~x~~,~~D 5 Ta~~ ~ o ~~ y ~ ~`~ ~~~ . ~, \ ~~. ~. ~_ \~ /~ \`J /, "~,}\ 1 '' .. ~ b / r ,~~. / ,t '_' ~' ,~ i „ ?~ .;~ i i ~~ i~ ~i ~~ ~i ~~ ~~ ~~ ti~ ~~ ~, ~~ i~ ~~ i ~i Eti ,~ ii ~t ,~ ~, ~. ,~ ~, ,~ ~~ ~~ ~~ _, ~~ ~ ~ `r, ~ Off` ~,` ~A ~~ ~*O`~ L~ `~ °`~' ~ow,,~c~ ,. ) ~ ~~~ 1 ~ ~ ~ c ~1 4 1 ~'/ ~~ ~~ ~ti~ t _ ... ~ r 1 ~1 - t _ - ,...._--- t1 .~ ~~ ~ ~~ Kr,. ~+ ~J e5r~ TI ~~ .~. ,_-.~"'~ ~~ .Tlf~u~~ $-~ ~-''' 6 ~,~~ ~~. . ~~ 1 ----~! C1 .` ,~-- ~2 _ ,,,., ~'- W D d m I~ i ~ ~ ~ E. ~ ~ , Jj~; i I i i ; ~ 1 ~ "~~ ~ N W _. ,' ~ t ~ ' t - ~ I 1 } ~ ~~ ~ e ~' ~~ ;c ~~ .~ N ee ~~~ ~ ~~ ~~rC ~~~~ ~' S-!~'` o,,,,~ ~n sQ *~- ~ F+ +~ . ~ ~~ ~~ ~ ~ 1 ti ' ~ ~~ _.~` ~ ; ;- ii ~..t~ 1 1 -~ - ._ N --, Lr..J (~