The URL can be used to link to this page

11. Peet's Coffee 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO.~ AGENDA DATE November 20.2007 SUBJECT: Consider a six-month review of the temporary Use Permit (U-2004-04) to allow an opening time of 5:30 a.m. for Application No. M-2006-07, Laura Thomas (Peet's Coffee), 20807 Stevens Creek Blvd. APN 326-32-051. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Uphold renewal of the Modification to the previous Use Permit, allowing Peet's Coffee to continue opening at 5:30 a.m., if the Stevens Creek Office Center provides a letter of intent to install a future pedestrian connection; or 2. Deny renewal of the Modification to the previous Use Permit, requiring Peet's Coffee to revert to opening no earlier than 7:00 a.m., if Stevens Creek Office Center does not provide a letter of intent to install a future pedestrian connection. BACKGROUND: On November 5, 2007, the City Council conducted a six-month review of the Modification application and continued the review on a 4-0 vote to the November 20th meeting. The Council expressed the importance of the pedestrian connection between the Stevens Creek Office Center that includes Peet's Coffee and the adjacent pedestrian connection that has already been constructed on the adjacent Whole Foods site to the west. The Council stated that the Stevens Creek Office Center should be encouraged to install the pedestrian connection to provide walkability between the office center and the Whole Foods and to provide pedestrians a more direct route to the Quinlan Center. As a result, the Council requested that the Stevens Creek Office Center provide a letter of intent stating that they would install the future pedestrian connection at the office center adjacent to the Whole Foods pedestrian connection at such time in the future redevelopment or remodeling occurs on any portion or parcel of the office center. With this letter of intent, the Council indicated it would support upholding the renewal of the Modification application to allow Peet's Coffee to continue opening at 5:30 a.m. 11 - 1 Six month review of M-2006-07 Page 2 November 20, 2007 --------------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------------- DISCUSSION: Staff drafted a letter of intent (See Exhibit A) for John Volkmann to review and sign on behalf of the Stevens Creek Office Center in accordance with the Council's recommendation. The letter clarifies the intent of the Stevens Creek Office Center to install the pedestrian connection when future redevelopment or remodeling occurs on any portion of the office center. Redevelopment and remodeling would entail exterior building renovations or the construction of new buildings or additions. Repainting or repair work on buildings would not be considered redevelopment or remodeling of the center. According to the property manager of the Stevens Creek Office Center, Mr. Volkmann is in the process of reviewing the letter of intent drafted by staff and intends to provide the letter prior to the November 20th Council meeting. Enclosures: Exhibit A: Letter of Intent Exhibit B: Minutes to the November 5, 2007 City Council meeting Exhibit C: City Council report of November 5, 2007 w / attachments Prepared by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner Approved by: ~ Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development David W. Knapp City Manager G:planning/pdreport/ appeals/M-2006-07, 6 month review, Nov 20 07 continued 11 - 2 Exhibit A November 14,2007 Dear City of Cupertino City Council, In response to your request at the November 5,2007 City Council meeting, please consider this correspondence as a letter of intent to install a pedestrian connection at the Stevens Creek Office Center located at 20807 - 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard at such time redevelopment or remodeling occurs on any portion or parcel of the Stevens Creek Office Center. Redevelopment or remodeling constitutes exterior building renovations or the construction of new buildings or additions. Repainting or repair work on buildings shall not be considered redevelopment or remodeling of the center. The pedestrian connection will be installed adjacent to the pedestrian connection that has already been constructed on the northeast comer of the Whole Foods site to the west. Sincerely, John Volkmann Property Owner Stevens Creek Office Center 11 - 3 November 5, 2007 Cupertino City Council Exhibit B Page 3 Approval of the fmal map perr!?BAfI forwarded to the Couoty for recording, which completes the subdivision. 11. Adopt a resolution accepting the quitclaim deed for underground water rights, Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, Kok Y. Ho and Yuet M. Ho, Hsing H. Kung and Margaret Kung, 21711, 21713 and 21731 Alcazar Avenue, APN 357-19-018, 058, 079 and 080, Resolution No. 07-182. Acceptance of the quitclaim deed releases any claim that the grantor has to underground water rights on the property named. 12. Adopt a resolution approving an improvement agreement, Chiao-Fu Chang and Sue-Fay L. Chang, Kok Y. Ho and Yuet M. Ho, Hsing H. Kung and Margaret Kung, 21711. 21713 and 21731 Alcazar Avenue. APN 357-19-018, 058, 079 and 080, Resolution No. 07-183. Through an improvement agreement with the City for a single-family development building permit, this applicant will be obligated to bond and construct city-specified roadside improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and driveway, along the street frontage of their building site. 13. Adopt a resolution approving a revised improvement agreement, Zhihong Liu, 10651 Merriman Road, APN 342-16-031, Resolution No. 07-184. Through an improvement agreement with the City for a single-family development building permit, this applicant was previously obligated to bond and construct city- specified roadside improvements, including curb, gutter, sidewalk, and driveway, along the street frontage of their building site. This revision of the original agreement is based upon an amended estimate of the cost of the specified improvements. 14. Adopt a Resolution authorizing the City Manager to enter into a Cooperative Work Agreement with the California Department of Transportation to extend the life of 2005- 06 Bicycle Transportation Account grant funds in the amount of $300,000.00 for the Mary Avenue Bicycle Footbridge Project, Resolution 07-185. ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR (above) PUBLIC HEARINGS 15. Consider a six-month review of the temporary Use Permit (U-2004-04) to allow an opening time of 5:30 a.m. for Application No. M-2006-07, Laura Thomas (Peet's Coffee), 20807 Stevens Creek Blvd. APN 326-32-051. Sandova1/Mahoney moved and seconded to continue the hearing until November 20 to allow the owner to sign a letter of intent to add an entryway for access from his property to Whole Foods when he applies to upgrade his office buildings. The motion carried unanimously. 11 - 4 ~~ . ~ . :r .Jr~) ~ -- 14 rl'~ ~ ~L . / ['1 . ,1' ; . ;:\.It' . ,1' I,': ..r:::. ~ I. . i.l J: lIl!!'" , I , 'IH .- - ~ " ~ =- -. =- -. ... = - y Exhibit C 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CUPERTINO Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. . AGENDA DATE November 5.2007 SUBJECT: Conduct a six-month review of a temporary approval of the Modification. to a previously-approved Use Permit (U-2004-04) allowing an opening time of 5:30 a.m. for Peet's Coffee, and include a review of the Use Permit, Application No. M-2006-07, Laura Thomas (Peet's Coffee), 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard, APN 326-32-051. RECO:MMENDATION: The City Courtcil may take one of the following actions: 1. Deny renewal of the Modification to the previous Use Permit, requiring Peet's Coffee to revert to opening no earlier than 7:00 a.m.; or 2. Uphold renewal of the ModificatiC?n to the previous Use Permit, allowing Peet's Coffee to continue opening at 5:30 a.m. BACKGROUND: On March 20,2007, the City Council granted temporary approval of a Modification (M- 2006-07) to a previously-approved Use Permit on a 5-0 vote, allowing Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 a.m. until a six-month review of the permit could be conducted by the Council. Additionally, the Council recommended that review of the original Use Permit for the Peet's Coffee/Panera Bread Cafe. building be conducted at the same time. The Modification application was brought to the City Council for review as an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of the modification allowing Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 a.m. The appeal was filed by Council member Richard Lowenthal. During the meeting, Council member Lowenthal explained the need for a pedestrian connection between the Stevens Creek Office Center, that includes the Peet's Coffee/Panera Bread Cafe, and the adjacent newly developed Whole Foods site to the west, particularly since the Council had anticipated this connection by requiring Whole Foods to construct its side of the pedestrian access on the northeast corner of the site. Additionally, some of the Council members raised the issue of inadequate parkb.1.g at the Stevens Creek Office Center to accommodate Peet's Coffee/Panera Bread customers. When these businesses first opened, customers were not aware that they could park elsewhere ill: the office center parking lot, and as a result, began parking off- 11 - 6 Six month review ofM-2006-07 Page 2 November 5, 2007 site at the adjacent Bombay Oven Restaurant and across the street at the Target shopping center. The City not only received complaints from the Bombay Oven Restaurant, but also from customers who said that the parking was inadequate for these businesses. In late February, the office center placed directional signs in the parking lot to alleviate the confusion and notify customers that additional parking was available in the office center parking lot. These signs were installed as a condition of the Planning Commission's.approval of the modification of the use permit. . However, since these signs were placed on site just a few weeks prior to the Council meeting, the Council was not able to determine the usefulness of these signs. As a result, the Council also voted to conduct a review in siX months of the original Use Permit that approved the Peet's CoffeejPanera Bread building to discuss this issue and that would allow for the Planning Commission to reopen the use permit at a public hearing and require permit modifications to address parking problems if necessary (See Condition No.8 of Exhibit A). John Volkmann, one of the property owners of the Stevens Creek Office Center, indicated that he did not support the pedestrian connection because the connection would result in the loss of a parking space at the office center and w:ould not be a safe route to Whole Foods since it would require pedestrians to cross the loading dock area of the Whole Foods site to enter to the grocery market. Additionally, Mr. Volkmann indicated that owners of the parcel of the Stevens Creek Office Center who are affected by the pedestrian connection are different than the owners of the Peet's Coffee and Panera Bread site. The City Council requested that this item be brought back for review in six months to. allow the property owner, John Volkmann, to consult with the other co-owners of the Stevens Creek Office Center on. whether they would agree to construct the pedestrian connection. The review of this application was delayed from occurring six months from the March 20th meeting because the City was awaiting a response from the property owners of the Stevens Creek Office Center on the pedestrian connection. DISCUSSION: Staff met with John Volkmann in early October who conveyed the property owners' determination that they would not support construction of the pedestrian connection on their property. Mr. Volkmann felt that the difference in walking distance from the mid- point of the Stevens Creek Office Center to the Whole Foods entrance and from the pedestrian connection to the Whole Foods entrance would be minimal. Staff measured these distances and found that one walking distance route from a mid- point along the west side of the Stevens Creek Office Center to the Whole Foods entrance would be approximately 1,040 feet (See Route A on Exhibit B). Another access route from a mid-poInt at the center of the office center to the Whole Foods entrance 11 -7 Six month review ofM-2006-07 Page 3 November 5, 2007 would be approximately 990 feet (Route B). However, the walking distance from the same west side starting point in Route A at the Stevens Creek Office Center to the Whole Food entrance using the pedestrian connection would be approximately 460 feet (Route C). Therefore, the difference in walking distance is significant. Staff believes the pedestrian connection is important because it allows more interconnectivity between the two properties that. would alleviate the need. to double the parking trips for customers / employees patronizing these two adjacent properties. In response to the concern about pedestrian having to cross in front of the loading dock area, staff would also like to emphasize that there is an additional pedestrian walkway behind the Whole Foods building linking the pedestrian connection on the Whole Foods site to Stevens Creek Boulevard, thereby providing an alternative pedestrian route (Route D) to the Whole Foods entrance without having to cross the loading dock area. This walking distance route is approximately 915 feet, which is shorter than the existing walking route between the properties. Also, customers routinely cross the area if they park in the northerly most aisle and staff is not aware of any problems. Regarding the parking issues, the Code Enforcement Division has not received any complaints regarding parking at this location since the opening of these businesses. Therefore, it appears that the parking issues have been resolved with the installation of the directional signs. Staff Recommendation: Staff believes that the expanded early morning hours of operation are an intensification of use on the property and contribute to the doubling of parking trips between the adjacent properties without the pedestrian connection. The City Council has consistently encouraged pedestrian connections between properties to facilitate walking and bicycle use. For example, the Council required pedestrian connections at the'.Public Storage site on Valley Green Drive to connect to the adjacent office complex site, at the Montebello condominium site to connect to the surrounding commercial developments along De Anza Boulevard and. Stevens Creek Boulevard, and at the Astoria condominium site to connect Imperial Avenue to Bubb Road. Therefore, staff recommends that the City Council deny the renewal of the Modification application that would require Peet's Coffee to open no earlier than 7:00 a.m., which is the City's current allowable opening time for commercial businesses throughout the City. However, staff does not recommend modifying the original Use Permit at this time since the parking issue appears to have been resolved with the addition of the directional parking signage. If the City Council feels th~se issues are separate and chooses to allow. Peet's Coffee to conHTIue its early morning opening time without the pedestrian connection, the Council could ask John Volkmann to sign a letter' of intent to provide the connection in the event he wishes to expand the office center in the future. 11 - 8 Six month review of M-2006-07 Page 4 November 5,2007 Enclosures: Exhibit A: U-2004-04 Conditions of Approval Exhibit B: Map of Walking Distances Exhibit C: Minutes of the March 20, 2007 City Council meeting Exhibit D: City Councj1 report of March 20, 2007 w / attachments Prep~red by: Aki Honda Snelling; Senior Planner Approved by: ~ David W. Knapp City Manager G:planning/pdreport/appeals/M-2006-07, 6 month review 11 - 9 Exhibit A City Hall 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014-3255 Telephone: (408) 777-3223 FAX: (408) 777-3366 Website: www.cupertino.org CITY OF CUPERJINO OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK June 9, 2004 Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20833 Stevens Creek Blvd., Suite 102 Cupertino, CA 9514-2154 Re: Consider approving Application No.(s) ASA-2004-05, U-2004-04, EXC-2004-03, EA- 2004-05; Stevens Creek Office Center Associates (Good Earth Restaurant); 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard; APN 326-32-051 : a. Adopt a Negative Declaration b. Approve architectural and site review for a new 7,100 square foot, one- story retail building and site improvements c. Approve a use pennit to demolish an existing, vacant restaurant and construct a 7,100 square foot, single-story retail building and site improvements d. Approve an e~ception to the front setback as required by the Heart of the City Specific Plan Dear Office Center Associates: At its June 7, regular meeting, the Cupertino City Council approved the project and added the' following requirement: 1) To do a written, joint parking agreement between the Stevens Creek Office Center Association ~d the property owner of the Bombay Oven next door; 2) That landscaping plans will be reviewed by the Design Review Committee; 3) On-street parking shall not be included as a part of the original plan. 11 - 10 p'-irimd an Recycled Paper ASA-2004-05 Page 2 June 9,2004 Th~ Use Permit conditions are as follows: SECTION ill: CONDITIONS ADMWISTERED BY THE CO"MMUNITY DEVELOPMENT . DEPT. 1. APPROVED PROJECT Approval is based on the plan set entitled: "GOOD EAR1H REDEVELOPMENT, STEVENS CREEK & SAlCH WAY., CUPERTINO, CALIFORNIA" dated March 31, 2004 and consisting of six sheets labeled AO through A4 and one unlabeled sheet titled: A.L.T.A. Survey for Stevens Creek Office Center, except as may be amended by the conditions contained :in this approvaL . 2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERV A TrONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (I), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and otherexactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you. fail to fIle a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally batTed. from later challenging such exactions. 3. RE'V1SED LANDSCAPE PLAN REQUIRED The applicant shall provide a revised site and landscape plan, detailing the r~quired front setback and streets cape improvements needed to meet the intent of the Heart of the City Specific.Plan. The plan shall be reviewed a.i1d approved by the Director of Community Development prior to building permit approval. 4. REVISED ARCHITECTURAL PLANS REQUIRED The applicant shall provide revised architectural draVvings and a fa<;ade design that is consistent with the design review comments of the City Architect as stated ill his letter of April 19, 2004. The plan shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development prior to building permit approval. 5. STREET ThfPROVEMENTS The applicant shall develop street improvement plans that include street parking with no reduction in the number of1;hrough lanes. The Director of Community Development shall work with the Director of Public Works to evaluate the safety of such an on-street parking plan along tIns segment of Stevens Creek Boulevard. Such parking will not be required ifit calmot be demonstrated to be s~fe. 11 -11 ASA-2004-05 Page 3 .JUt'"1e 9, 2004 6. EVALUATI"ON OF DRIVEWAY GATE STRUCTURE At the building permit stage, the applicant shall provide a structm-al evaluation of the driveway wooden entry gate to ensure its structural soundness and safety. 7. RECIPROCAL INGRESSIEGRESS EASEMENT The applicant shall record a deed rest~ction for necessary reciprocal ingress and egress easements betw.een adjacent properties to the south, north and wes~, to be implemented. at such time that the City can require the same of adjacent property owners, subj ect to . approval ofthe City Attorney. The easement shall be recorded prior to issuance of building occupancy. 8. POTENTlALPAREINGPROBLEMS If project parking becomes a problem, the PJalming Commission may re-open the use permit at a public hearing and require pernnt modifications to address parking problems. 9. STORM FLOW PERCOLATION AND DETENTION At the building permit stage, the applicant shall provide site design measures that increase on-site percolation and detention ofstOllTI flows. Design. measures shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Community Development. SECTION IV. CONDmONS ADMINISTERED BY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT 10. STREET WIDENING Street widening, improvements and dedications shall be provided in accordance with City Standards and specifications and as required by the City Engineer. 11. CURB AND GUTTER Il\1PROVEMENTS Curbs and gutters, sidewalks alld related strqctures shall be installed in accordance with .grades alld standards as specified by the City Engineer. 12. STREET LIGHTING INSTALLATION Street lighting shall be installed and shall be as approved by the City Engineer. Lighting fixtures shall be pos.itioned so as to preclude glare and other fOffilS ~f visual interference to adjoining properties, and shall be no. higher than the maximum height pennitted by the zone in which the site is located. . 13. FIRE HYDRANT Fire hydrants shall be located as required by the City. 14. TRAFFIC SIGNS Traffic control signs shall be placed at locations specified by the City. 11 - 12 ASA-2004-05 Page 4 June 9,2004 15. GRADING Grading shall be as approved and required by the City Engineer in accordance with Chapter 16.08 of the Cupertino Municipal Code. Please contact Army Corp of Engineers and/o~ Regional Water Quality Control Board as appropriate. 16. DRAINAGE Drainage shall be provided to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Pre and Post- development calculations must be provided to identify if storm drain facilities need to be constructed or renovated. 17. FIRE PROTECTION Fire sprinklers shall be installed in any new construction to the approval of the City. 18. UNDERGROUND UTILITIES The developer shall comply with the requirements of the Underground Utilities Ordinance No. 331 and other related Ordinances and regulations of the City of Cupertino, and shall coordinate with affected utility providers for installation of underground utility devices. The developer shall submit detailed plans showing utility underground provisions. Said plans shall be subject to prior approval of th~ affected Utility 'provider and the City Engineer. 19. IMPROVEMENT AGREEl\ffiNT The project developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City of Cupertino providing for payment of fees, including but not limited to checking and inspection fees, storri1 drain fees, park dedication fees and fees for undergrounding of utilities. Said agreement shall be executed prior to issuance of construction permits. . Fees: . a. Checking & Inspection Fees: $ 6% of Off-Site Improvement Cost, or . $2,268.00 minimum b. Grading Permit: $ 6% of Site Improvement Cost c. Development Maintenance Deposit: $ 1,000.00 d. Stann Drainage Fee: $ 894.37 e. Power Cost ** . f. Map Checking Fees: N/A g. Park Fees: N/A 11. Street Tree N/A ** Based on the latest effective PG&E rate schedule approved by the PUC Bonds: a. Faithful Performance Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvements b. Labor & Material Bond: 100% of Off-site and On-site Improvement c. On-site Grading Bond: 100% of site improvements. 11 - 13 ASA-2004-05 Page 5 June 9,2004 -The fees described above are imposed' based upon the current fee schedule adopted by the City Council. However, the fees imposed herein may be modified at the time of recordation of a fIual map or issuance of a building permit in the event of said change or changes, dle fees changed at that time will reflect the then cun"ent fee schedule. 20. TRANSFORlVIERS Electrical transformerss telephone vaults and similar above ground equipment enclosures shall be screened with fencing and landscaping or located underground such that said equipment is not visible from public street areas. 21. DEDICATION OF WATERLINES The developer shall dedicate to the City all waterlines and appurtenances installed to City Standards and shall reach an agreement with San Jose Water for water service to the subject development. " 22. BEST MANAGEMENT PR<\CTICES Utilize Best Management Practices (B:MPs), as required by the State Water Resources Control Boards for construction activity, which disturbs soil. BMP shall be included in your grading and street improvement plans. Pre and post-development (B:MPs) shall be included within every plan set to the maximum practicality, which could include but not limited to grassy swales, sand filters. detention basins, pavers, permeable pavement and additional landscaping. 23. TRAFFIC The applicant shall submit a traffic control plan to the City to be approved to the satisfaction of the Traffic Department. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed prior to obtaining a building pemlit . 24. ENCROACHMENTPERNITT The developer shall be required to obtain an enCrOac11l11ent pel111it for all work that is perfonned in the City's right of way. Please contact Diane Arrants at (408) 777-3245 for infomlation regarding this permit. 25. SHARED DRIVE'" AY The developers of both sites must submit a signed agreement approved by the City, which sets aside a driveway easement along their adjoining properties. 26. TRASH ENCLOSURES The trash enclosure plan must be designed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Programs Department. Clearance by the Public Works Department is needed pdor to obtaining a building permit. 11 - 14 ASA-2004-05 Page 6 June 9, 2004 The exception conditions are as follows: SECTION ill: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. APPROVED ExtHBITS Approval is based on the plan set entitled: "GOOD EARTH REDEVELOPMENT, STEVENS CREEK & SAlCH WAY, CUPERTINO, CALIFORNI.,o\" dated March 31, 2004 and consisting of six sheets labeled AO through A4 and one unlabeled sheet titled: A.L.T.A. Survey for Stevens Creek Office Center, except as may be amended by the conditions. contained in this approval. 2. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS. RESERV ATYONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication requirements, reselvation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (I), these Conditions constitute written notice ofa statement of the amoUD,t of such fees, and a descrip#on of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020( a), has begun. If you fail to file a protest within this 90-day period complying with all of the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. 3. FRONT SETBACK EXCEPTION A front setback exception for the buildfug of up to five feet is granted. Please review conditions carefully. If you have any questions regarding the conditions of approval, please contact tbe Department of Community Development at 408-777-3308 for clarification. Failure to incorporate conditions into your plan set will resuU in delays at the plan checking stage. If development conditions require tree preservations, do not clear the site until required tree protection devices are installed. .' . Tlte conditions o.f project approval set fortlt hereirJ may include certain fees, dedication . requirements, reserJ'ation requiJ'ements, and other exactio.ns. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d}(1), these conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount af such fees, and a descriptiolt of tlte dedications, reservations, and other exactions.. You are hereby fUl'ther no.tified that the 90-day approval periad in which yo.u may protest these fees, dedications, and other exactio.ns, pursuant to Govemment Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If you fail to file a proterr l1Jithin tltis 90-day period complying with all of the requirements af Sectio.n 66020, you will be legally barred from later cltalleT1girlg such e;-.;actiollS. AllY i11.tel'ested persoll, including tlte applicant, prior to seeking judicial review o.f the city council's decision in tlIis matter, must first file a. petition for reco.llsideratio11. Ivitlt the city 11-15 ASA-2004-05 Page 7 June 9, 2004 clerk Withil1. ten days after the cou11.cil's decision. Any petitio It so filed must comply with municipal ordinal1.Ce code 92.08.096. Sincerely: ~c1111A~r- Grace Schmidt Deputy City Clerk cc: Community Development 11 - 16 Exhibit c March 20, 2007 Cupertino City Council Page 6 related to the design and east side balcony, and modifies the planning commission decision per the motion. The motion carried unanimously. 16. Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to modify the use permit for Peet's Coffee to allow an o'Pening time of 5:30 a.m., Application No. M-2006-07, Laura Thomas (Peet's Coffee), 20807 Stevens Creek Blvd., APN 326-32-051. The appellant is Council member Richard Lowenthal. (Continued from March 6). Community Development Director Steve. Piasecki highlighted the staff report via a PowerPoint Presentation. Council member Richard Lowenthal explained that he had appealed this item because of the issue of inadequate parking on the Peet's Coffee side. He said this is a good opportunity for people to park once and shop twice, to allow pedestrian access between Whole Foods and the Peet's Coffee/office center parking lot. He also said he was concerned about Peet's Coffee opening of 5:30 a.m. because it was an imposition on the community including more traffic and noise early in the morning, and even more crowding for that parking lot, particularly for the office users. Mayor Wang opened the public hearing. Ellen Sinnott, District Manager for Peet's Coffee, asked Council to address the hours of operation for Peet's Coffee so that their permit is in compliance with the 5:30 a.m. opening time, whic~ is consistent with when their competition opens. John Volclanannm, property manager, said he met with Mr. Lowenthal because he didn't understand the connection between Peet's request to change the hours of operation and creating a pedestrian access. He sai~ that tenants wouldn't use' the path because they would have to cross a loading dock area with no sidewalk, and he was concerned about skateboarders, etc. causing liability issues. He added that it would impact the office center tenants to lose one of the parking spaces required in order to create the opening and he wasn't in favor of creating the access. Goeffrey Etnire, attorney for the Stevens Creek Office Center, distributed a letter addressed to Council outlining his comments. He noted that the issue is the question of whether there is a real nexus between.Peet's opening at 5:30 a.m. and the pedestrian access. He said that most pedestrians would use the Stevens Creek sidewalk. He urged Council to deny the appeal. Mayor Wang closed the public hearing. LowenthallKwok moved and seconded to grant a temporary use permit allowing Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 a.m. and to review the entire use permit in six months. The motion carried unanimously. Council was in recess from 9:32 p.m. to 9:39 p.m. 11 - 17 Exh~bit ~ 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CITY OF CUPEIUINO Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. AGENDA DATE March 20. 2007 SUBJECT: Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision 1::0 modify the use permit for Peet's Coffee to allow an opemng time of 5:30 a.m., Application No. M-2006-07, Laura Thomas (Peet's Coffee), 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard, APN 326-32-051. The appellant is Council member Richard Lowenthal. RECOMMENDATION: The City Council may take one of the following actions: 1. Uphold the appeal of M-2007 -06- and deny the Planning ,Commission' s decision; or 2. Uphold the appeal of M-2007-06 and modify the Planning Commission's ,decision; or 3. Deny the appeal and uphold the Pl'anning Commission's decision; or 4. Continue the appeal to the April 3, 2007-City Council meeting. BACKGROUND: On January 9, 2007, the Planning Corrunission approved a modification to a use perinit to allow Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 a.m. Peet's Coffee is located in a building constructed in 2005 that is shared with Panera Bread. The building is located on a par!=el on the north side of. Stevens Creek Boulevard, west of Saich Way, that is part 'of the Stevens Creek Office Center. The Stevens Creek Office Center is also adjacent to the Whole Foods supermarket that is being constructed along Stevens Creek Boulevard to the west. On January 16, 2007, COl,lIlcil member Richard Lowenthal appealed M-2006-07 stating that the pedestrian circulation issue between the Stevens Creek Office Center and Whole Foods needs to be resolved in conjunction with this application. DISCUSSION: When the adjacent Whole Foods project was approved by the City Council in January of 2006, the City Council required Whole Foods to incorporate a pedestrian access along the northeast corner of the si~e to accommodate a future pedestrian connection between the Whole Foods site and the Stevens Creek Office Center. 11 - 18 "M-2006-07 Appeal Page 2 March 20, 2007 Whole Foods is currently under construction and has nearly completed its portion of the pedestrian connection with a concrete pathway that runs along the. north side of the Whole Foods building and f?teps dpwn to a pad that is adjacent to the west side of the Stevens Creek Office Center. Whole Foods will also be installing a handicap lift to a.ccom.rnodate the grade differential between the pathway along the north side of the building and the pad adjacent to the Stevens Creek Office Center property. Co:uncil member Lowenthal. is requesting that the Stevens Creek Office Center complete the pedestrian connection between these two sites by installing- the improvements needed on the Stevens Creek Office Center for the pedesn:ian pathway in conjunction with the Peet's Coffee application. Staff has 'reviewed fue possibility of incorporating these improvements" that woUld . require a pedestrian "opening between the two properties, installation of a concrete, pedestrian ramp and walkway connecting from the pad landing on the Whole Foods site to the west side of the Stevens Creek Office Center, and possibly handrails and a switch back of the ramp. This would result in the loss of at least one, but possibly two, "' parking spaces. If a slope of 1:20 can be achi~ved, then it appears a straight "pedestrian.: . tamp cart be constructe'd on th~ Stevens Creek Office Center side from the Whole Foods. pad landing. If a 1:12 s.lope is required, then h8?drails and a switchback. of :the r~p .- will be required, resulting in the loss of one adc;litiOllal space. . ; -.- " On March 14,2007, staff received comments from the pr~perty owner, JohriVolckmann 1?tating that he does not agree to the installation o~ the pedestrian connection arid yvill be. attending tonight's meeting to speak about his concerns. . . EnclosUres: Exhibit A: Appeal submitted by Richard Lowenthal Exhibit B: Planning Commission Resolution N 9,. 6440 approving Peet's Coffee 5:30 a.m. opening Exhibit C: Minutes of the January 9,2007 Planning Commission Meeting Exhibit D: Planning Commission staff report of January 9,2007 w / attachments Exhibit E: Aerial photo Exhibit F: Whole Foods Plans" Approved by: -.&....;_.... ~ ,. - Ste' e PiasecKi Director of Cqmrntimty Development ~~ David W. Knapp City Manager 11 - 19 Exhibit A Grace Schmidt From: David Knapp Sent: Wednesday, January 17, 2007 10:43 AM To: City Clerk Subject: FW: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision ----Original Message----- From: Richard Lowenthal Sent: Tuesday, Jqnuary 16, 2007 11:21 PM To: Steve eiasecki Cc: David Knapp , Subject: Appeal of Planning Commission Decision' Dear Steve, I wish to appeal the decision to extend Pete's Coffee hours to 5:30 AM. Before changing any Use conditions for Pete's I believe we need to see the pedestrian circulation issue between Pete's and Whole Foods resQlved. Thanks very l1luch, Richa'rd 11 - 20 1/1 7/? 007 M-2006-07 Exhibit B CITY OF CUPERTINU 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6440 OF THE PLANNJNG CO:MMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO A USE PERMIT (U-2004-04) TO ALLOW A COFFEE SHOP (pEET'S COFFEE & TEA) TO BEGIN HOURS OF OPERATION AT 5:30 A.M. IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL RETAJL BUILDING SECTION I: FINDINGS . WHEREAS, the Pl~g Commission of the City of Cupe~o received an application for a Use Permit Modification, as described in Section II of this Resolution; and . WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and . WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the application meets the following requirements: a) Th8.t the use is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which the proposed Use is to be located. ! . 'b) That the property involved is adequate in size and shape to' accommodate the proposed use: c) That the proposed use will not generate a level of traffic over and above that of the capacity of the existing street system. . d) That the proposed use is otherwise not detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general' '".. welfare ~f personS' residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed uses, nor injurious to property ~d improvements in the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE,BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other evidenc.e submitted ~ this matter, the application for 'use permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and That the sub conclusions upon which the findings and conditions specified in this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application M-2006-07 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 9, 2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herein. SECTION II:" PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: M-20.06-07 Applicant: Laura Tomas (pe~t's Coffee & Tea) Location: 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard 11 - 21 Resplution No. 6440 Page-2- M-2006-07 January 9, 2007 SECTION ill: CONDITIONS ADMJNISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. PREVIOUSCONDITIONSOFAPPROVAL All prior use permit conditions .for U-2004-04 shall remain in effect, unless in conflict with the conditions of approval for M-2006-07. 2. HOURS OF OPERATION HOUTS of operation shall be 5 :30 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily (Monday through Sunday). 3. DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE . Within 30 days. of this approval, the applicant shall install directional signage il1. the parking lot behind the Peet's CoffeejPaneraBread building and in the Peet's Cbffe~ shop . informing customers that additional parking is available in the adjacent office complex to . the rear and to tl).e west. 4. NOTICE OF FEES, DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS . The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees, dedication . requirements, reservation requirements, and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d) (1), these Conditions constitute written noti~e of a statement of the' amount of such fees. and a description' of the de~cations, reservationS, and other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the; 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications; reserVations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Secti.on 66020(a), has begun. IfyC' fail to file a protest" within this 90-day period complying wIth all of the requirements of SectiOL. 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. . I: ". PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of' J anuaIy' 2007 . at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of Califoriria, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: .ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Saadati, Wong COMM1SSIONERS: Chien COM::MISSIONERS: none COM::MISSIONERS: none ATTEST: APPROVE Is/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development . /sfMarty Miller Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupert~o Planning Commission g/planning/pdreportJres/2006/M -2006-07 11"22 PI 4 January 9, 2007 Exhibit C Com.. Wong: . Said he suppa d the application and was hopeful that the applicant would work with staff on delivery schedul Com. Chien: . Said it was a decisi n about being consistent with what the Planning Cpmmission decided recently when allowm Starbucks to open at 5:30 a.m. It relates to competitive fairness, and given the added conditi n to bring back the application should there be any problems with .the neighborhood, he said he upported the 5:30 a.In. opening time. Com.. Saadati: . Said that considering there 't been any neighborhood complaints and the Planning Commission approved a simil application recently for a 5:30 a.m. opening time, he supported the application. . . If a problem occurs and the ap lication returns in six months, more information can be provided to the Planning COmmiSSl n at that time. Chair Miller: . Said he support~d the 8:pplication. . Noted that the side of the Peet's Co e building facing the condo complex, .was a solid masonite wall which would serve as a r buffer for noise from Peet' s coffee. . . Motion: Motion by Com. Wong, second b~om. ChIen, to approve App~catiDn M-2006. 06 for Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 ~,~s days per week, with the condition that in the event the city receives a compl . t from the neighborhood, the nse permit be brought back to the Planning Co \.. sion to consider additional mitigation measures that may include reduction of hours. (Vote: 5-0-0) 2. M-2006-07 Peet's Coffee & Tea (Laura Tomas) 20807 Stevens Creek Blvd. Modification of a Use Permit (U-2005-11) to allow' an opening time of5:30 a.m. Planning Commission decision final rmless appealed. Aki Honda Snelling presented the staff report: . Reviewed the application for modification of an existing use permit for the Peet's Coffee Stevens Creek location to open at 5:30 a.m. Staff supports the 5:30 a.m. opening time because of its location, surrounded by commercial uses. The opening time permitted is 7 a.m. and the applicant is requesting to open at 5:30 a.m. to be consistent with other coffee shop opening hours. Staff supports the 5:30 a.m. opening, and recommends that the property owp.er be asked to put up additional directional parking signs as noted in the staff report. . Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the use permit with the 5:30. a.m. opening time with the additional condition read by staff. 11 - 23 Planning Commission M ,tes 5 January 9, 2007 Ellen Sinnet, Peet's Coffee and Tea: . Said the objective of the application is to become compliant with. the legal operating hours. She said they were willing to comply with the property owner along with their construction department to address the signage issue so that parking is clearly stated. Com. Wong: . Relative to the parking ratio that Panera Breads and Peet's has been successful with, he C3,sked staff to indicate on the aerial where they were directing the auxiliary parking. AId Honda Snelling: It lllustrated on the aerial that there was parking along side each building in the complex. Com. Wong: . Said he was concerned that the customers not be inconvenienced. He said he did not want to tie the hours to Peet's Coffee, and suggested having the landlord address the issue on a separate application and a hearing. He reiterated that he did not want to hold up Peet's Coffee on their hours. . Questioned if it could be conditioned that if it could not be resolved at the staff level, it be brought back to the Planning Commission. He said he was not concerned about the hours. . Ms. Wordell: '! ~ She said that staff would research the i~sue since she did not recall if when the build.jng was approved there was any knowledge of that' or any expectation that would be the case. It will , .., .have ~o bF.disc1;1Ssed with the prop~ owner:, $"0 that peopl~ donpt p.ave to go to the.far . comers of the development to parle. . . . . . . Suggested teay.4lg the condition stating. tJ;l.ere .is a dIT,ectiQnaJ;.sign and hopefully it will b~ adequately resolved where the parking is :w;ithout coming pack ~o; ,tl;1e f1anning Commiss~on. It can be brought back to the Planning Commissio~ i~n.ece~sary. Chair Miller: . Said he recalled the meeting where the owner was present and he said that he owned the whole section and would do whatever it took to make the parking work; and if Peet's was having a problem, he would make sure there were other areas of parking open. . He said Com. Wong's point was well taken, and if there are reserved signs on that other space, they need to be removed as part of the condition of approval. Com. Saadati: . Said that he was familiar with the area and has walked along the parking lot at 5 :45 a.m. when there were very few cars parked and not many people in the building. However, he said in the afternoon. there are not many empty parking spots in the area. . He suggested putting signage for Peet's Coffee parking, otherwise the office people park there all day and there won't be any parking available. He said it was an item they needed to have the owner's recommendation on; hopefully, in the future the signage and additional parking will help resolve the issue. . He said that there is no direction, and it is confusing. . Supports the 5:30 a.m. opening time. Com. Chien: o Said he was not opposed to the 5:30 a.m. opening time, however, he eXpressed concern with the condition regarding the directional signage. He said the project was approved before his 11 - 24 Pl~g Commission M tes 6 January 9, 2007 tenure on the Planning Commission, but he recalled hearing that the mayor- had an agreement with the property owner to install directional signage. . He said the conditions as they appear this evening, indicate that the responsibility falls on the applicant Peet's Coffee. He said he would rather have that go back to the property owner and have them keep their word on that. Vice Chair Giefer: . Not opposed to 5:30 a.m. opening'time. . . Recalled the meeting that approval for the building they now occupy, and said those spaces on this corridor were part of the parking calculation for the building. She pointed out that four Commissioners that were part of the calculation were still on the Planning Commission. She said that people could park where they wanted, since they would not get towed. . She said that she wanted it fixed, and supported the dkectional sign because it would encourage people to be more bold about parking where they want; but they should talk to the, property owner about removing the reserved parking signs' and putting in the directional signs, '. because ifPeet's Coffee puts up directional signs for Peet's, they are not go'ing to put them up for Panera Breads. Ms. Wordell: . Said the parking complianpe would be a matter of enforcing the use permit for the original ' building, that if they have altered it, then that is an issue as far as being in compliance with:, , their use permit. . ., . She s8.id the directional sign is appropriate to tie to, this ,application since they have the <- ; leverage for the sign. ' , Vice Chair Giefer: ' , , .. . it Said she felt it serves Peet's Coffee; and would help tb:em in their business situation to put the directional signs in for their business. , " . : . Said she agreed that the property owner should be brought back to the Planning Commission ;. because they are in v!-olatlon of their use permit because they do have reserved parking signs. .; " . Ms. Wordell: ' . Suggested that they move forward in that manner; through Code Enforcement talk to the property owner about compliance, stating they need to comply within a certain period of time and if they don't, they are subject to revocation. . Staff wp1 report back to the Planning Commission. Com. Wong: . Expressed concern that it was a lengthy process of going through Code Enforcement. He said he was inclined continue the application 'and have the landlord come before the Planning Commission to straighten it out, since going through Code Enforcement adds more time. He said he would like to have the problem fixed in a timely manner. Ciddy Wordell: . . Said to the city attorney that she assumed there was nexus between the parking issue and this application. 11 - 25 Planning Commission :N... .tes 7 .January 9, 2007 Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney: . Said she felt the Planning Department could work faster and the item diQ not have to be continued because of that She said she felt a letter from the Planning Department on revocation of a use permit would get instant action. . Com. Wong: . Relative to the sign., he asked if Peet's Coffee was responsible for the sign or the property owner, since the model resolution is vague. Ellen Sinnet: . Said she understood that their cons1ru.ction department would be in touch with the landlord and partner to make sure the signage was implemented. She said she was not opposed to incurring the cost of the sign to get it fmalized, especially if they are not reserved parking places, so that their customers have the autonomy to park wherever they want in that facility. . She said she did not know if because they were not the property owner, if they had the authority to remove the reserved signs. She said the construction department would address the issue with the property owner. Ms. Wordell: . Said it was two separate issues; they will work with the property owner to get the directional sign. which will. not state anything about reserved spaces or. not, and they would work' separately with the property owner on enforcing their use permit relative to parking spaces. . She said if the property owner did not comply, it would possibly take two months to schedule a public heanng regarding the reserved. spaces. . . . Com. Wong: . . . Stated.his concern to the city attorney, that if they go through the Planning Department- or. . . Code Enforcemen~ it is to get their attention; and four commissioners recall that the propertY' ; owner-said that .he would comply and resolve the issue. He said there was:an underground -, ' .~ \. parking garage where office employees can park and the goal is to have successful retail and 'a good interface. Presently it is miserable finding parking at Peet's Coffee and Panera Breads.. Eileen Murray: . Said that the city looks at the use permit and sees what the agreement was on parking and goes to the property owner explaining the agreement, and stating they are in violation and will be subjectto some action. . . She said the city would not go out and remove the signs, and she did not think it would take two months. She said it was not likely the property owner would come to the Planning Commission, as the property owner would see the terms of the use permit and would likely correct the issue. Chair Miller: . Questioned if they were within their rights as a Planning Commission to tie the two issues together. Eileen Murray: . Said she felt they were not related; early hours for 20 customers is not related to the parking shortage. The ans.wer is that it is not legitimate and it appears to be a stretch. 11 - 26 Planning Commission N...~tes 8 January 9, 2007 . Said if the directional signs are necessary fo~ additional parking and they are agreeable to doing that, that is fine. She said she did not think they should tie this application to that; this application is about extended early morning hours when there is no parking problem. Chair Miller opened the public hearing; there was no one present who wished to speak. Com. Saadati: . Said he supported . the 5:30 a.m. opening time aild said that the parkirig issue could be addressed through staff, and as per the attorney's statement, they are not related. . Said the parking on the narrow strip should be'made available; it is the property owner's responsibility. . Com. Chien: .. Said he supported the 5:30 a.m. opening time. . . Relative to the directional signage, he said he understand his colleagues' desire to have the parking issue resolved expeditiously; however, as the applicant stated, they are going to go to the property owner anyway, and through that process it doesn't guarantee that it is going to move any faster because the property owner will likely stall as well. Furthermore, the city attorney said there was no legal nexus and it is a far stretch for directional signage. He said . while he would like to tie the two together, he did not think they should do that; the responsibility falls on the property owner as they promised for quite a while now. . Supports the application without the condition for the directi,onal signage. Com. Wong: . , . Supports the application for the 5:30 a.m. opening time. . Supports staffs recommendation regarding directional signage; and said he hoped that Peet's Coffee wouldwo~k with the property owner to resolve his concern about parking. He asked that. a sentence be added that if they cannot resolve it:~. sta:ff7level, staff bring it back to.;the Plannin~ Commission. Vice Chair Giefer:. . Supports staffs recommendation of opening at 5:30 a.m. wj.th the directional signage. . She said it appeared that Peet's Coffee does not object to putting in the signs, and she felt it serves their customers. She said she would also like to see some'results on staff's side; she said she was flexible with the push. and pull regarding the property owner to solve the overall parking issue that exists.' Chair Miller: . Supports the application. Said he hoped that staff moves quickly to address the parking issue; it is more than taking reserved labels off the parking locations. As Com. Saadati suggested, perhaps it is putting Peet's or Panera Breads labels on those locations so that more parking is reserved for the business~. Ciddy Wordell: . That is going beyond what can be asked given that it was left open as part of the use permit Chair Miller: . He referred again to the owner stating at a meeting that he would make good on the parking whatever it took. He said this location is underparked; the space between the parking on one side and the parking on the other side is substandard; and in general it is a problem; he 11 - 27 Planning Commission M ies 9 J~uary 9, 2007 . . promised us when we ~pproved the application that he would return to support our other solutions if we had a problem. He said he was almost reluctant to approve the application because if this is the leverage to do that, they should use that leverage despite the city attorney recommending against it. . Ciddy Wordell: · Said she did not recall the exact condition of the use permit, but the Planning Commission might need to invoke that condition if they determined that the parking problem has to be readdressed and in fact bring them back for that. Chair Miller: · Suggested that they research exactly what was approved and what the conditions were, to ensure that the Planning Commission is on. firm ground. . He said he specifically recalled the property owner making that commitment. Ciddy Wordell: .. Suggested they follow through with the research, report back to the Planning Commission, and if the Commission is m a position to bring it back as a hearing item. staff can be directed to do so. Chair Miller:. · Suminarized that they handle the parking by going to the original hearing for the Qriginal use permit and moving forward in that manner. . . Motion: Motion by Com. Chien, second by Com. Saadati, to approve Application M-2006-07, without the co~ditioJl that ~ere be directional signage installed. .......: Com. .'Vong: . .. . . Asked the Planning ~ornmission for their opinion about the directional signage. Vice Chair Giefer: · '. Said she felt they needed the directional signage as a bandaid until the bigger issues are solved. Chair Miller: . Said he agreed. Com. Saadati: · Commented that the dir~ctional signage does not have to be permanent, it can be removable. and Peet's Coffee can have it up in the back, similar to a real estate sign, and it would provide direction for people on a temporary basis. Vice Chair Giefer: · Said the solution should be that the landlord put in additional signage that says there is parking ~t Peet's Coffee and Panera Breads. · She said three commissioners felt strongly that there needs to be something done immediately to address the parking. Com. Saadati: · Said that staff will follow up, and if the landlord doesn't comply, the permit would be revoked. 11 - 28 Planning Cormnission M .tes 10 JanuBly'9, 2007 Com. Chien: · . Said they were discussing leverage and were always interested in how to get the' applicants to comply. He pointed out that in the present case, the leverage is that the current property owner is in violation of their agreement. He said they need to enforce that and make that happen; which is the reason he does not support putting the responsibility on the tenant, but on the property owner who made the original promise. No friendly amendment was proposed. (Vote: 2-3-0; Motion failed; Chair Miller, Com. Wong and Vice Chair Giefer voted No.). Motion: Motion by Vice Chair Giefer, second by Com. Wong, to approve Application M-2006-07 with the directional signs. (Vote: 4-1-0, Com. -Chien .voted No. He said he supported the 5:30 a.m. opening time; however didn't see the legal nexus between the signage and the opening time.) Eileen Murray: .. Asked if the directional signs were going to direct Panera Breads andPeet' s Coffee customers into spaces that are now marked reserved. It is not lmmvn what arrangements the landlord has made with other tenants, whether or not they are paYing for reserved parking; and. where are the directional signs to recommend where the people park until the Planning Department reviews the use permit. Ciddy Wordell: · Said the.intent is that it is open parking; and.it would state that additional parking is available. . . The wording is in the condition; it is just available parking to the west. . Eileen Murray: " . ; · Said she did not want to burden this applicant with tl;1at kind of competition or problem with other tenants on that propertY owner's property, where the property OWller is actually responsible for abiding by'the use permit. She said to put the tenants in competition or conflict might be a mistake. Chair Miller: · Said at this point there are some spaces designated reserved and they are not being 'changed; they state there is further parking in this direction. There are some spaces that say reserved and some that don't say reserved. He said he was uncertain if there was any difference from the current situation. Eileen Murray: · Asked where the directional signs were direc1:ing people to park; what is the proposal? Chair Miller: . · Apparently it is just a general directional sign, they are not specific. Com. Wong: · Asked staff if the landlord could return under Old Business within 30 days or was a motion needed. 11 - 29 CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Exhibit 0 Application: M-2006-07 Agenda Date: January 9, 2007 Applicant: Laura Tomas (Feet's Coffee & Tea) Owner: Stevens Creek Office Center Associates Location: 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevanf, APN 326-32-051 APPLICATION SUMMARY: Modification of a use permit (U-2004-04) to allow an opening time of 5:30 AM. RECOMMENDATION: . StaH recommends that the Planning Commission: 1. Approve the Modification to the Use Permit (U-2004-04) with recommended changes in accordance with the model resolution. Project Data: General Plan Designation: Zoning Designation: Specific Plan: Site Area: Parking: Feet's Coffee Tenant SF: Total Building SF: Commercial/ Office/Residential p Heart of the City 29,185 square feet (.67 acres) . 35 on-site, severcU hundred shared with adjacent p~king spaces . 1,834 square feet 7,100 square feet . Hours of Operation Currently Allowed Hours: Proposed Hours for Peet's Coffee: 7:00 a;m. to 11 p.m., seven days a week 5:30 a.m: to 11 p.m., seven days a week Environmental Assessment: Categoricany Exempt . BACKGROUND: The applicant, Laura Tomas of Peet's Coffee and Tea, is requesting approval to modify all. existing use permit (U~2004-04) to allow Peefs Coffee & Tea shop located at 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard to begin its hours of operation at 5:30 a.m. Peet's Coffee & Tea is located in a building constructed in 2005 that is shared with Panera Bread and is located along the north side of Stevens Cre~k Boulevard, west of Saich Way. It is surrounded by a business office compl~ t~ the north and west, a restaurant to th~ east and commercial uses to the ~outh across StevenS Creek: Boulevard. There are no residential uses surrounding this site. The applicant was requested by the Plaru1ing Department. to submit applications to extend hours for both of the Peet's Coffee & Tea shop locations in Cupertino after staff. 11-30 M-2006-06 Page 2 January 9, 2007 became aware in October during the hearings for a Starbucks coffee shop that both of the Peet's Coffee & Tea shop locations were operating earlier than the allowable 7 a.m: DISCUSSION: Peet's Coffee & Tea shop is requesting approval to operate between the hoUrs of 5:30 a.m. and 11 p.rn. daily. Allowed hours are 7 a.m. to 1:J. p.rn., so only the earlier opening time requites approval. '. The request is consistent with the proposed morning opening time of the other Peet's Coffee & Tea location on Homestead Road and w?-th other coffee shop locations throughout the City that have been granted early opening times. Starbucks was granted 5:00 a.m. opening times for its locationS on the cqrner of Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards and on the comer of Homestead and Wolfe Roads, which are in similar . commercial locations like this Peet's Coffee & Tea shop. Peet's has already been opening at this time and wishes 'to continue with these . hours. Cupertino's C;::ode E11.for~ement Division is not aware of any complaints related to its:early morning hours at either of its Cupertino locations. Staff Recommendation Staff supports the proposed application, but reco~e~ds that a condition of approval be added to address the confusion over allowable parking areas for both th~ Peet' s Coffe'~ and Panera Bread tenants. When this building was approved, the approval allowed for' shared parking between the adjacent office ~omplex to the north ~d west and'the Peet' f? Coffee/Panera Bread building. Since the opening of these businesses in 2005, staH has received complall1.ts from customers about the parking situation for this building. ' Additionally, some City Council members also expressed. their concerns about the parking confusion. Apparently, customers were not aware that they could park in'the adjacent office complex behind the building and, instead, were parking on' adjacent properties. As a result, staff contacted the property owner a number of times requesting that directional signs be placed in the parking lot behind the building to notify customers where they could park. However, this has not yet been accompli$hed. Therefore, staff recommends adding the following condition of approval to require directional signs: "'Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall install directional signage in the parking lot behind the Peet's CoffeejPane.ra Bread 'building and in th.e Peet's Coffee sIwp infonning customers th.at additional parIdng is available in the adjacent office complex to the rear and to th.e 'west." Enclosures: Model Resolution Plan Set 11 - 31 M-2006-06 Page 3 January 9, 2007 Submitted by: . Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner ' Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developm~ G: Cup~rtinoNT /PlanningIPDREPORT /pcU sereports/2006ureportslM -2006-07 .doc 11 - 32 M-2006-07 CITY OF CUPERTINO , 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 MODEL RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A MODIFICATION TO A USE PERMIT (U-2004-04) TO ALLOW A COFFEE SHOP (FEET'S COFFEE & TEA) TO BEGIN HOURS OF OPERATION AT 5:30 A.M. IN AN EXISTING . COMMERCIAL RETAlL BUILDING SECTION I: FlNDINGS . WHEREAS, the Plarining Commission of the City.of Cupertino received an applica~on for a Use Permit Modification, as described in Section IT of this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the applicant has met the burden of proof required to support said application; and WHEREAS, the Plaiming Commission findS that the application meets the following requirements: . . . a) That the use is in conformance with the General Plan of the City of Cupertino, and is not detrimental to existing uses or to uses specifically permitted in the zone in which. the proposed use is to be located.. . b) That the property involved is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed use. c) That the proposed use ,wjll not generate a lev~l of traffic over and above th~t of the ~apacity, of the existing street system. d) That the proposed uSe i~ othenVise not detrimental to the health, safety, peace, morals and general welfare of persons residing or 'working' in the neighborhood of such proposed uses, nor injurious to property and improvements in ~.e neighbo:~ood.. '. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony' and either evidence submitted in this matter, the application for use permit is hereby recommended for approval, subject to the conditions which are enumerated in this Resolution beginning on Page 2 thereof; and " That the subconclusions upon which the findings and conditions specifie~ ill this resolution are based and contained in the public hearing record concerning Application M-2006-07 as set forth in the Minutes of the Planning Commission Meeting of January 9, 2007, and are incorporated by reference as though fully set forth herem. SECTION IT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: M-2006-07 Applicant: Laura Tomas (Feet's Coffee & Tea) Location: . 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard 11 - 33 Model Resolution Page-2- ' M-2006-07 January 9, 2007 SECTION ill: CONDmONS AD:MINISTERED BY THE CO:MJ\.illNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT. 1. PREVIOUS CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL , All prior' use permit conditions for U-2004-04 shall remain in effect, unless in conflict with the . conditions of approval for M-2006-07. . ' 2. HOURS OF OPERATION Hours of operation shall be 5:30 a.m. to 11 p.m. daily (MC?nday through Sunday). 3. DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE Within 30 days of this approval, the applicant shall install directional signage in the parking lot behind the Peet's Coffee/Panera Bread building and in the Pe~t's Co#ee shop informing customers that additional parking is' available in the adjacent office complex to the rear and 'to the west. ' 4. NOTICE OF FEES; DEDICATIONS, RESERVATIONS OR OTHER EXACTIONS The Conditions of Project Approval set forth herein may include certain fees~ dedication requirements, reservation req~emeri.ts; and other exactions. Pursuant to Government. Code Section 66020( d) (1), these Conditions constitute written notice of a statement of the amount of such fees, and a description of the dedications, reservations, and. other exactions. You are hereby further notified that the 90-day approval period in which you may protest these fees, dedications, reservations, and other exactions, pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(a), has begun. If yo fail to file a protest within this 90-day.period complying with all of the requirements or Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exactions. . , PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of January 2007 at a regular meeting of the PI:;mning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COM:MISSIONERS : COMJ\1ISSIONERS : ATTEST: APPROVE Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupertino Planning Commission 11-34 & Tea~ I Prol"" Da.. 'NJJICI' ADOUIIII 81111 &m..CIIft .....c:.,.n....CA ",""U'-JJ.GJI 1COI'I0I'W01lIrI IHDNDR. TllWlTIMI'NJVIMIHT. COIJIIIOC_I. TltUM.NIC Inl.ClCIII{.O'C.lI...CMC.....urc...... cuun.,., IUILDIHO'nrIt nn.,.1PllICLIJWI ua .... oc::cur>>tCl'GROUr.~ IIIsnNClPt l,bUP ,a.11'OIUIISt1 oc:aJI'NlcrLQM CAl.CU1.A1:IORI DCC\II'ANCr MIA LoAD IACI'OI. '0CCUPNn1 RlTNL '" ,. II 5IATJNC 'DO " U IMI'Unu. IGl ... , IJllCI< ,4lI '" , _AI. .. DIIII W.......J... .........'1 bk.WaI........"".... ".........,~ J .....w........ aranrlbl. SG'" !nw.AmenwJ Hnldl NGaI 1. .AU"". heJN tit ClIme fiom... ....mtd MIll""""" IIIUICL 1. ^ mPT Df mt mal" .,...dudal whit W equJpmall an ahmL H. par_lID, ta-do.. f.._ will be -..ed. Faaeur pnpuaJ utd wnppal --'_--'_-'l__-'....--I._....IIL.__J ..,_ r_~_I_I__n'. .-.- _......1....... N........ c.. .'O.....'lIm .........CA ..... "--_J2W7J2 ,. (cHS JD-2AC c:....-a........... ~'.AnWr.:I: JCa.olIIWrlp. IE ........ I.. ......1WrlI.........4D111 IMj-.CA"IU 1'hI... (4al)'H4mII "'.'""111 c-.e1eM.... -....- , '........I'1pIllIM....._lr:v...... I_A.. o..tc .Y-......... PI.. _ Db....... DaaII e..................... .......... ................... ..............,........ ...... ""'. ..........-.......- .....'Iol...._ c:.rar.."'24 ..,................... .... ..................... MJ HVAC.....S........ ... .........DoolIo M1 11dt14"_ PI PI Pl N .. ., It Il .. II Ii c............ .,...-..... -" ,.r-.a.J4J!II I't...: (41-'1 4JJ.DJW r.CCnHJJ.D1I' ""- "", eo- .......,-....... ......."""....... IJIIt.......,...c- ID .....1...... .... ............ '''''' ....... 1'12) 11J4U4 ....,2/......" "'-... ...... ~ -... ....CoII1oo""' """'..... In..... ...... ......- """" IlooJb -... ...-- ........... G<n<n1 No,.. Prol"" T..... I ~~!a:.:-~~~~~ ~CdftIlT. GlMIMLCOIf'fMC1'Ol.tW.J.:MUlI'lJMllLlIOAALLamlIHCIIIIIIDDUI1VHJlMILUII. TO I" ...kAt._ DaJO. ~IIIt,CA'4G01 . .alrrIll'UJrfU,DaGIHlL\LcatmW:nJI,"IW.IIQlrQMlSlUraaAlL,ID.'I""",, ........UIIJ'~101 WUTTCOMNIC1lOt4 NDAHDcmlllAIIOCaATlDCDII1A1l11qU1UDa'COVUMN"" .... (SIll) JM..l11D AGIHCIUaaummtDMl'ANIIL c..../t.rwIItq,~ . PlJMTIlU'IOIIUOIClIHlULCI:lff1'MCI'OI.ItWLUlUlafflllUraIAI.Lcomuq,UUlID ,..,......... IrlHlSltOHlMCl'DOCUNIHPOI.GUYUNWIHTAClNCflllllCAlO1'OMI'ICJ1DH,. a..-c...,.., 4 ALLWOII.AHDNA1IIlW.JfWLUDlalnDIMIIUlJ.ACX:aIDNfCI1'ft'HALLNI'UCAILI .""4..-....101 CODU, 51. Wd. CA '4"1 ......14IJJ1J7-tD1 , ClMIMLI:ONTMCn:IIIMt.....,.DlANO...~Pa.AU.mIT1"...rulUC ....141JJJJ1-4W 'AV1'ICI1IJHAI AIqUIMD IfTWlcatnlACfDODJMlNlJAHD ~DDYntWINTM:IHaIL c-- DatW I_ I DT1III:II.IlCHMlIAI~ON"'IDtlCUNINTI.fOl~Dfr9.fANDIHf rUM'll UQUUlID IMM1.I1 uNoIaA'1IWW1 caNI'MCt. 7 fIlUlantlaUllHIJUNfDCA"",,,UIIQUlflID'Q'LaQLc:oYIlHellllfTAGIHCrIlUlLII IICMDID If IilHlMl.mH1"MCnJI AND N:LUbIa "CDI'fI'MCT. . CIHIM&.~II&Ill.LIM"NOAMIJOHUL1IMI1CliHI0IlCflAt<<:ll'ftlTlII"" llfOWH ..ntl c:aHr'MCrDDCUMlH'B-..maUM'HI1'MM ...,.,... Al'l'MJ\l'M.Of'l1ll MCMmcrANOfG..awttw IlII'NIINT<<m'L tfOADDmoNlU.com nIOM'nfIGDfIML c:otnIACTDllHAU.llc:Df4ll)lRlUAHOntawauW.' ........1'0 IIMWaft11 wrntDUT.wac 1tIfIf:tfM.1' MCHmcT. , GlJ4lMltl:lM1"McnJlltWJ.l'IlUvtalTMlIUlLDlNl:omaALWl'nIACllm1tCI.ftOl cotm'IlUCt1OH~,,"," ItIDGYcaHlIlVA110HfTANQUDI UlaN PlHM.1UILIMtta DIPlWIUHTturICI'IOHIlWHlW UqIIUQ. .. GIHIMLmN'J'MCnll.IAU.I'III'AIlI1MIPLaalLlYlLN'tDIoWOCITHAMOrumDlfOIn. PIUJtIG 011 "1.1....001 DIIAIN. flDOIlIHU 01 unta.1IDf DlPIlIIIICItIIo CIM;Q aa 1IUIIGUlAIItIU.. JLaalllAL II CIHIMLCUHTMC'I'OaIMALL'Ila'IIDlACCIIII'NfILI..ML NOIIAI MqlJftIIJ "CDDI. LDrIrrIOtfI TO" AnrCI'I1D If AACHrnc:r AHDIaIo..... ...1DDfrATlft.... TO uar:unoH a, WOIUL UI cotnMCrOIllI'RIVDI't'AL1.DJMIMlIIaMIAtfD IXImfC ICONOI'nOf'IIOHntI.-n.MlDII QIPONIIILI POICDtPlINIICNftJCDIlAIIA't1IC w.qu.vmnGoVtD DINIJ'ItOMI.IIUC1'1CI rAINCIl.1lDH PltaCDlDAHD 1"ICMNtqUU ap 'lXIItIn'IlUCI1 caaaDlHATlNG H.,.... wau. 'IIPrt1IAlLOOI..TMDUNCI...........HWMIllwaalIHAINLCOIlWUTI,AHD MlWAaDUMNINIL 11 .w.WALLHolINIlCINIMI'.DJI.'rD '.GI.,u.a.N. 14 rumDlIlDCDfCATWAUlWHIUuq,uuDPUIIUl'falTOPIf'K.VIMO. 11 MLatnTO..afINA&I.....IHIIDIWITlfCJurUlIOfAar. Occupllllq Dlal'lIII t] , 31H711f'*1 CnU..... c.,_"'''''4 f! ::I ..... U Ql ..... .c l: <C Q) E E u r..ars. "15'~ &'DdlIIItIS'-I & DelIIJ 1111.-1 &DoIollIlD~ I , ~ I , a I . I ! . :l J I . q cq ~ q q ....,.~.u. ....r a k " / PL<lO& PWlICu Nom CD JWft:II::N'ACI:IINU...lM C!> ACallIlUUMlYMAllIA. ' no, CIJf1'UI.I""'IIA"IIAIJINDfGtmMaJlTGMJaMWIf \:,/ Clfft'lUJtU.DJlIUNDlR\ArMallUU.""".....-. (!) CIHmII....orDUI.IM.IINIMIfIlnMC."TOWCN_ ::~~=~.r.U::QIIltnNu.. S a: J ~ Ii' YATU HMTU /'UmIIMAlGYl.Jl'W ftTIaNlAl1llG \.:J nuWAU..._J:rM,"NJ m ~rNJ'IlO1f'INI.tn'Df"''''''''''IIIACrIlllNfaUII:AItGN \:J IWDITV""-M.lAnaKlUllllTAIL.."U (!) "~1'''''~'''''' @ "" ...,......nu.ncwlDllaTIlClIoII1OWtI:IlLDMWIHCtII @ 1IJ',1W'..........'.HIUUl'f'ftTJ. (3t IlHCMaaClUllIMTII.........,."..lItlIrN.lW @J PIaVlOIIHTINMlaW.nMIOLWACCI.UIIIIInmClrtM.rrA1. (!!) IICIIIUII ~1CU.1'Nt1U @) ............ tji"I ItorWATUIIHClOMMI'II'IIMXIDIUUMCIIIlu'VA'nMIIIWw.L.. \:,:I I./IlUTIOOIlO'tlfD....cavun. nuuaMU..tfIaItWll'InIA1MWn ""UM:lJUKDlllA'fATUllIU. 1II:U1.Uot.l.l @ ucttJ1lfCalINT1lOU @) MIolMrDAnlNAHD """TlUI8'rMlNMClOfG1P.1CMIlO. @ "~'I'WMCl.WlD @ I'ImIIlIfDIIftAfTMLI.......AHDIfmWDITran. @ Al'rU'IMDUI11DI:UlTAL......'.TII.rrwaaIlllWCIAIIG, @) "~MDN. IIP.DlQLltMr @ rNnMLIJr. YJW. TIIr.., (8) TJAlHQff"au..)tunl. ~_I W.... LI.cwuI .TIMAHI'................."P.AMDLDM. I I :::c...w.bI1'QINtOMr_~Gft'.IIL.uUIfIIMDhlk"'" ~ 1_LU'tWD.AU..rIr.IM,.U....rrvDI..lrcu:..JrI'VII'.1D.1IP 1DTl11tOll1U.O,tI"f'MMtI....11 MTT.MU\Anaft ..IlIII1OIlMWALIJ...... TUr~llll~~fttITMll:NAlMOft.aTMar_ LaE:AnatI......'nIMna...."......UD&TM."'IlL - ::..~~~.:.c:~=-=f.:c::.:"..::~:;,'::.. rMrllCllMUlAntIfI.wnoaN...... 'Wl\U.TO"MOftlHlCllUfICl ~nt.nlll:;r..u..YLJKVUlUl'lW4...uan._DrrMIW' ........ .. """'WM1' ... all IIfI"_G&MlfALfI'WI M llIqUWD" trr" G1r.'a.OH ltrr.IIDIN'lO lit .,.n NIlAMetlatt &IT..... PAINT In.... TllMATOt. 9M.l TIIr ......11I1CllUNl:J -'UCltDlVl1'WI'CJVMAwn. lIOIU.'O~MDft....DU"'IMI'__ . fLoa.'lAIf .~ I!I.ounolw. N01Ul L ......LOC:IlnD..JCI.........IICIWlGlAll.lallll. . """"'''....'''armII.l~fMIIIUCY.fA''..I...,.._1CII1IMIf nlIlU~''''''''_'IIII'''''I.''''''''''' ... ""'''AlLDJ1rla''In'I~''''''' 4 =I:o~~';:!:.:'===t:;~:';:'=~,=. un..,..'*W MetA' LJ uu. nMCI TOafUI OIIAU I...... .rmu. DaDa .. "","WIlUnn ,fIMItI.,IlATaI'IIIIAoWIIIU'...."amcrtOIffl n11l11'T\~' .. ItLUrIIIIf>>IIMDfIllll&TIf. ..... "" ... "" r IC"I' . I .... IICW N'J\ Nfl wn . ... I1lI B ~ r..-.r.r '.r.,.... ;::r;;::;: NO. , . , ! , . '1.00& Pwt GaMJIW,. N~ I CIItIaUIIlAITONl'IIOYID.IOIl.IIrTIUOIl,.,...LGAltMJI,IlHIIQUII MMKIJ1MoCl. nIlWAW~T1I1AUA.~"IMvonL IUUDRlDWNMMllIU1.I'Wf1IID IMaG11t MfII.AI'TID. lna Dooa Typu ~DUV^nDHS -\&. lI\UI.UtMl , rr rACTO/I.' ""11M ~ tml'laml2Ad mil: IfCIUDW'cotI. ...-... " ..... " ~ ........... ..- ~. \ . "NHlPIITal JC'Ir IaUDC'OfIlWaaD ... - & (A."=:WIAM .wISUII~~:t'~:.-:~~~~ .. ... na,aoulQIACI&SU It.. III. t.JaflrlMrUfAHDV 'W.........MKMtIlftDIlUmM.ItrT'IIm..a.m1'lllNl, D.arroaouAUw ....lRKwn1toVfUltCl.lI UI',rrt::W. m-uDGI GIlI".,.r. arLDCIIl MAl'UIlnD_T1f&MUlIIIIIT9MIIITHlMAtIItGT CIOCIJ.HAlACIWo\IUL jAlCDfflDnllDClOlllTA11I'iGI11IIIDOOII.MUlTIDoMf UI&DCnD~1UIIh. ,.I.ndIlGHI,IAlLAIMlm'IIft!a1'WlnWC_tfQl IrGIDN"ctlIftMIJIMGJACltGMlUla. . l.urMTO.... PGKLaaafUetll nnclMIn'Ta CII:IIIr I ........ tc.lIlJRIIlHW 'N 1fInIDW'NanU. tom. IoIITA , ...... . IOUDCllIIl I' " ]" '1 ',', ,:( :....'" '. + 1.....,... I . . I I" .:,....,4 ~,::Ij.: I. :: . .-,. 1:. :." .- ;('";1 ,. :. 'll' "'1;:' ,;.~:'. ". , :. '. i, . , , . ~ ; ~ (. I .."_. "'-'--.J ....__... \.; j! :. ......:-.h :!~:~~....~ ..'~~!' ..:1. -/ I I .., .~. ....... .. ~. 'H .... ......' . ....~.... ., J I J 2 1_.. ........ ...'. .. " 7';"'::"11" , , _,.< ;..~.J I - 0' .: ':..: :..(" ,i ~, : .' ;[1 i _~..~:~: I: ::.... :--,'[.:, '. : ...." \ _, _ 1 i -. c:r ;:;: ", 1 .' .~ .,j' 4:' \' I' .. -- ......... .,t. . ....,....:t. " .-- ,("-,--.., ~. ..... .- r .:...~ . ", ~:;..:;- I . :1"Ui ---.~- 1,Ii ,. ". tI .. , .1 -\~"--\:' f;"~lJ '1 ;'i 'l ~:, , .j 1 -. . .! .., I .. ,......';., '-' -.- ! , .; I :i , , " f ~--- :-~;".;~;~ - ; r~. ., 1. 'j yl : }! .,\ ..~::- . ;Jr- ,,"J: . II f' ' ~ f .f :; /'1 _ r~ 1 ~ ~ :1 rJ.' :; r.. C.. ~.. ~ '. -, ~;':. I '. ...... ...... I W --.j - IUi .- _.- E9 -...- ~r~~ WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO, CAUFORNIA SAND HIU. PROPERTY COMPANY ~ Ko "":"lIeel., lno. , Ql ...,...."...-, r.-NIlI.C11 lUll ..lalll!.t.... ..... ',. IIISlLIU.1141 i -. c:r == ." - ;LiI1NI awtrrAL ......,... """"Al. N\'tItlIII'UICln' NMIlrrIt... ."". r\.M'." .....rr -,- E9 I'RELMIWll SITE PLAN . SIIEIJ, BUlG PLAN kEY MAP .l ~ or" -...,.... 'i- I -.j - exllTl<<I ......,.... .-1:,1..:.;:".... '~I""" . !........- " -'.- '-{', ... .f'} }!o, : L::::; :::::- l!)(.,..... - "",,"1_ 1Il1LD... ( .~~., = -...., CJ ~rl ..:"-'c,o ~ T A6ULA Tl0N5 aJl1! ....... .... AClGa tuu.. ..J HelU'REfA.tl. ...... ...., .ACRU ,.".... .J tEIII fLOOR ......, LS1 ACfItS t6AJW IFJ ~.AAKHGI ,,. 5l.AU.5 TOTAl. aTAND""',,~ JIJ .'A1..L8 Ca-r..-cT ,.A*l<<i ,..."'... B" 6T.4l..L& ACCEUIIIlI: ""'FICIfG, , .'ALL6 VAN ACce.51."~ I .r.&l.L6 .~ 6T.al.L& P"'I!JlI ..... ". N....,. t!/O.,f,YCARIiI LlTTLI! ""-LAG. i~t_ Pll/Illlllljl emllllUn/III' _L2?- La '5 II I) I,. II," c/o' Cnll ,clI_ IT ~_\e_.__ r " G ;'<0:: .... __,.a.... y.., IIDIIlllU:l...I.o....IaI'''"' ......lIIa~--.x.' I ...." 0,.,. _....o..u ~&"Cllt 1....LA~nculDl..'""J..,,1 1 ~_.-... L.-aN:M-....... l~".,.~e:~~ ! I ...,.~u~"......LC&,.. I rB u_- (;lgna c -< o rr: C1 z ..J ..J W I- III :I: I- rr: o z .. ..- PREUMINARY SITE PlAN STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD .... .... , t.o) CIO .,cO <P III III III III ~ III fl -_..J..J__ I I I . I I I I --.....-- .t-. J I l I --1- -. r --.- " I /I I 15 " (FUTURE 5ec;U~TY GRille 3, LAYOUT REMOVED. GRillI:: TO ae SUBMITTED TO CITY AT LATl!Fl DATE UNDl!Fl 5EPARATE 5ueMITTAU 13 1&&'-I2l" +264.56' 61:E CIVIL pLU:;,e. 124'-2" 2'-6". 412l'~4. 15'-1" WMr1~ P'OO t;>$ . . 3 AI.4 . BUILDING ONE: FROFOeED ONE- 4 rWO-5rORY BUILDING . (OCCUFANCY GROUF M WITH MINOR ACCE5eORY UeE B) FIJ~eT FLOOR .. 62,4.32 eF. (INTERIOR FLUe MARKET HALL CANOFY) p~ffZ.lAN O"'t-\st,., D N +21&4.58' - eeE CIVIL pLU:;,e. . \Il I N Q , in ~ o Q [1 G ~ ~ [l ~ ~ ~ [[ @: ~ IE ~ ~ lTIl [@ ~ (1@' Oct 13 07 09:06p John Volckmann 7603417617 p.2 November 16, 2007 CC /II2IJIo1 :It I I EXHIBIT Steve Piasecki Planning Director City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Re : Stevens Creek Office Center 20807 - 20883 Stevens Creek Boulevard Dear Mr. Piasecki: In response to your request at the November 5, 2007 City Council meeting, I am providing you with this letter to describe the intentions of Stevens Creek Office Center Associates with regard to the proposed pedestrian connection to the northeast corner of the Whole Foods site. It is our intention to install that access at such time as we undertake redevelopment or substantial remodeling of the office park. At the time of any such redevelopment or substantial remodeling, we will enter good faith negotiations with the City on the access ramp and other conditions of approval. It would not be our intention to install this access in the event that we are merely repainting, repairing or undertaking a minor remodel of the office park. For example, we intend to replace the mansard roofs in the near future and we do not consider that work to be a substantial remodel. Weare making this good faith statement of intent on the assumptions that the installation of the access would not require the removal of a tree, the installation of ramp, compliance with ADA requirements, and/or the loss of more than one parking space. As to the loss of that one parking space, we understand that the City, for all present and future purposes, would include the missing space in our total of actual parking spaces. I hope that this letter answers your questions with regard to our intentions. Sincerely, Stevens Creek Office Center Associates, a California Limited Partnership, by VFI, LLC its General Partner ~~ J Vo1ckmann ging Member ofVFI