Loading...
16. Appeal Peet's Coffee 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 (408) 777-3308 FAX (408) 777-3333 CITY OF CUPERJINO Community Development Department SUMMARY AGENDA NO. J(P AGENDA DATE March 20, 2007 SUBJECT: Consider an appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to modify the use permit for Peet's Coffee to allow an opening 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 Planning Commission's decision; or 4. Continue the appeal to the April 3, 2007 City Council meeting. BACKGROUND: On January 9, 2007, the Planning Commission approved a modification to a use permit 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 parcel 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, Council 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 site to accommodate a future pedestrian connection between the Whole Foods site and the Stevens Creek Office Center. 1(P-1 Printed on Recycled Paper 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 steps down 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 accommodate the grade differential between the pathway along the north side of the building and the pad adjacent to the Stevens Creek Office Center property. Council 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 pedestrian pathway in conjunction with the Peet's Coffee application. Staff has reviewed tILe 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 achieved, then it appears a straight pedestrian ramp can be constructed on the Stevens Creek Office Center side from the Whole Foods pad landing. If a 1:12 slope is required, then handrails and a switchback of the ramp will be required, resulting in the loss of one additional space. On March 14,2007, staff received comments from the property owner, John Volckmann stating that he does not agree to the installation of the pedestrian connection and will be attending tonight's meeting to speak about his concerns. Enclosures: Exhibit A: Appeal submitted by Richard Lowenthal Exhibit B: Planning Commission Resolution No. 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 ~~// ~ \ Ste' e PiasecKi Director of Community Development David W. Knapp City Manager /~-'2- 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, Ja,nuary 16, 2007 11 :21 PM To: Steve p'iasecki 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 resolved. Thanks very much, Richa'rd 1/17/2007 /(,..3 M-2006-07 Exhibit B CITY OF CUPERTINO 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, California 95014 RESOLUTION NO. 6440 OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO APPROVING A MODIF'ICA TION 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 RETAIL BillLDING SECTION I: FINDINGS , WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino 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) 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 pennitted 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. e) 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 of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed uses, nor injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other 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 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-2006-07 Applicant: Laura Tomas (Peet's Coffee & Tea) Location: 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard /&..'/ Resolution No. 6440 Page-2- M-2006-07 January 9, 2007 SECTION ill: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY 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 (Monday 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 CoffeejPanera Bread building and in the Peet's Coffee 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 requirements, 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 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. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 9th day of January 2007 at a regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: Chairperson Miller, Vice Chair Giefer, Saadati, Wong COMMISSIONERS: Chien COMMISSIONERS: none COMMISSIONERS: none ATTEST: APPROVE Is/Steve Piasecki Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Is/Marty Miller Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupeliino Plalming Commission g/p larming/pdreport/res/2 00 6/M - 2 006-07 /(P..S P] 4 January 9, 2007 Exhibit C Com. Wong: . Said he support~d the application and was hopeful that the applicant would work with staff on delivery SChedUle\ ' Com. Chien: . Said it was a decisi~ about being consistent with what the Planning Commission decided recently when allow~~, 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.m. opening time. Com. Saadati: . Said that considering there asn't been any neighborhood complaints and the Planning Commission approved a simila 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 Commissi, n at that time. Chair Miller: . Said he supported the application. . Noted that the side of the Peet's Coff~e building facing the condo complex, was a solid masonite wall which would serve as a furtfier buffer for noise from Peet's coffee. \ \ Motion: Motion by Com. Wong, second by"Com. Chien, to approve Application M-2006,.. 06 for Peet's Coffee to open at 5:30 ~\m., 7 days per week, with the condition that in the event the city receives a compHunt from the neighborhood, the use permit be brought back to the Planning Co~'~ssion 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 of 5:30 a.m. Planning Commission decision final unless appealed. AId 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 owner 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. I.G, -ft, Planning Commission Minutes 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 asked staff to indicate on the aerial where they were directing the auxiliary parking. AId Honda Snelling: . Illustrated 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 issue since she did not recall if when the building was approved there was any knowledge of that or any expectation that would be the case. It will have to be discussed with the property owner, so that people do not have to go to the far corners of the development to park. . Suggested leaving the condition stating there is a directional sign and hopefully it will be adequately resolved where the parking is without coming back to the Planning Commission. It can be brought back to the Planning Commission if necessary. 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 ifthere 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: . 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 /(P-7 Planning Commission Minutes 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 directional 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 if Peet's Coffee puts up directional signs for Peet's, they are not going to put them up for Panera Breads. Ms. Wordell: . Said the parking compliance 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 said the directional sign is appropriate to tie to this application since they have the leverage for the sign. Vice Chair Giefer: . Said she felt it serves Peet's Coffee; and would help them 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 violation 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 will 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. /ft;-8 Planning Commission Minutes 7 January 9, 2007 Eileen Murray, Assistant City Attorney: . Said she felt the Planning Department could work faster and the item did 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 construction 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 finalized, 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 hearing regarding the reserved spaces. Com. Wong: . Stated his concern to the city attorney, that if they go through the Planning Department or Code Enforcement, 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 subject to 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 answer is that it is not legitimate and it appears to be a stretch. /(P"9 Planning Commission Minutes 8 January 9, 2007 . Said if the directional signs are necessary for 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 and said that the parking 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 directional 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 would work with the property owner to resolve his concern about parking. He asked that a sentence be added that if they cannot resolve it at staff level, staff bring it back to the Planning Commission. Vice Chair Giefer: . Supports staffs recommendation of opening at 5:30 a.m. with 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 businesses. 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 It, -(0 Planning Commission Minutes 9 January 9,2007 promised us when we approved 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 in a position to bring it back as a hearing item, staff can be directed to do so. Chair Miller: . Summarized that they handle the parking by going to the original hearing for the original 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 condition that there be directional signage installed. Com. Wong: . Asked the Planning Commission 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 directional 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 at 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. / (p -1/ Planning Commission Minutes 10 January 9, 2007 Com. Chien: . Said they were discussing leverage and were always interested in how to get the applicants to comply. He pojnted 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 sign age and the opening time.) Eileen Murray: . Asked if the directional signs were going to direct Panera Breads and Peet's Coffee customers into spaces that are now marked reserved. It is not known 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 that kind of competition or problem with other tenants on that property owner's property, where the property owner 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 directing 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. /(P-I2. CITY OF CUPERTINO Exhibit 0 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORT FORM Application: Agenda Date: Applicant: Owner: Location: M - 2006-07 January 9, 2007 Laura Tomas (Peet's Coffee & Tea) Stevens Creek Office Center Associates 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard, APN 326-32-051 APPLICATION SUMMARY: Modification of a use permit (U-2004-04) to allow an opening time of 5:30 AM. RECOMMENDATION: Staff 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: Peet's Coffee Tenant SF: Total Building SF: Commercialj Office I Residential P Heart of the City 29,185 square feet (.67 acres) 35 on-site, several hundred shared with adjacent parking 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: Categorically Exempt BACKGROUND: The applicant, Laura Tomas of Peet's Coffee and Tea, is requesting approval to modify an existing use permit (U-2004-04) to allow Peet's 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 Creek Boulevard, west of Saich Way. It is surrounded by a business office complex to the north and west, a restaurant to the east and commercial uses to the south across Stevens Creek.' Boulevard. There are no residential uses surrounding this site. The applicant was requested by the Planning Department to submit applications to extend hours for both of the Peet's Coffee & Tea shop locations in Cupertino after staff I {p./ 3 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.m. daily. Allowed hours are 7 a.m. to 11 p.m., so only the earlier opening time requires approval. The request is consistent with the proposed morning opening time of the other Peet's Coffee & Tea location on Homestead Road and with 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 corner of Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards and on the corner of Homestead and Wolfe Roads, which are in similar cornrnerciallocations 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 Code Enforcement 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 recommends that a condition of approval be added to address the confusion over allowable parking areas for both the Peet's Coffee and Panera Bread tenants. When this building was approved, the approval allowed for shared parking between the adjacent office complex to the north and west and the Peet's CoffeejPanera Bread building. Since the opening of these businesses in 2005, staff has received complaints 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 accomplished. Therefore, staff recommends adding the following condition of approval to require directional signs: "Within 30 days of this appwual, the applicant shall install directional signage in the parking lot behind the Peet's CoffeefPanera Bread building and in the Peet's Coffee shop informing customers that additional parking is available in the adjacent office complex to the rear and to the west." Enclosures: Model Resolution Plan Set I {, ~/'i M-2006-06 Page 3 January 9, 2007 Submitted by: Aki Honda Snelling, Senior Planner ~ I Approved by: Steve Piasecki, Director of Community Developme~-c::::.....-- G: CupertinoNT /Planning/PDREPOR T /pc U sereports/2006ureports/M - 2006-07 .doc / (p ~/5 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 (PEET'S COFFEE & TEA) TO BEGIN HOURS OF OPERATION AT 5:30 A.M. IN AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL RET AlL BUILDING SECTION I: FINDINGS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the CityofCupertino received an application for a Use Permit Modification, as described in Section IT ofthis 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) 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 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 of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed uses, nor injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED: That after careful consideration of maps, facts, exhibits, testimony and other 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 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 IT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION Application No.: M-2006-07 Applicant: Laura Tomas (Peel's Coffee & Tea) Location: 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard /(;../ft; Model Resolution Page-2- M-2006-07 January 9, 2007 SECTION III: CONDITIONS ADMINISTERED BY THE COMMUNITY 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 (Monday 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 Peet's Coffee 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 requirements, 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 you fail to file a protest within this 90-dayperiod complying with all of the requirements of 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 Planning Commission of the City of Cupertino, State of California, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: COMMISSIONERS: ATTEST: APPROVE Steve Piasecki Director of Community Development Marty Miller, Chairperson Cupertino Plamling Commission 1(;-/7 Vicinity Map ........ Cln_g. Occupancy Diagram Peets Coffee & Tea~ General Nores 1 CENEJVJ. CONTllACTOR SHALl R!VIEWiHE CON'TRAcr DOCUME/'lTS AND VEnlFY All. OlMEN.510NS .-.NO CONDlnoNS ON nU.JOB SITE PILIOR TO UECUTtNCTHE WORK. CONTllAcrOR SHALL /IIOT1I"fTI-\~.uCHITECT ANDiOR OWNER.5 WRE5ENTATlVEIMMEDIATElY Of ANYDISCmANCIEs. CENERAl. CONTllAcrOR SHAl.L.BEUSI'ONSIBt.E FOR AU COSTS 1NC1J\lJLED DUE TO H15 MJWk.E TO DD'" J I'EIlMIT EXl'EOITEROIt GENEIW.CONrnACrQR.SHAll n.E WPONSJBU FORALtfUS, PiRMITS, unUTYCONNlCTlON fEES AND OTHfllA5S0ClATEO com AS IlEQUllU!D BYCOVE.IlNMENT AGENCIES 011, unUiY COMPo\NI.E5 ! PERMIT I!XI'EDITER ORCENEML~crOllSHAll BE llESPONSlBl! FOllAllCOSTS REQUIRED BYTIlESECONTJt.\.CT DOCUMENTS OR COVERNMEN'T A(;E!'lCY 1N IlECAAO TO INSPECT"JON . ALL WORXAND MATERlAl SHA1.lIlE f..UctfrED IN I'l.lUACCOIl.OANCE WITH ALlAl'1'UCAlItE CODES. , GENERAL CONTlAcroR SHALL I'ROVIOEAND IE IWiI'ONSIBt.E FOllALl COSTS FOil I'UBUC PROTecnON AS IlEQUlIlED DYTHE CONl"RAcr DOCUMENTS AND WeAL GOVERI'IMEr-rT AGENCIES. , EXTERJOIlSIGNAGEAS SHOWN ON nlESI! DOCUMENTS IS FOR CONVENtENCl! OM.Y 1J'ID ANY PERI.IITS R.EQUlItEDSHAl.L II! UNDER ASEl'AJlATl! CONTRACt'. 7 FlU EX'llNGlJ!SHER$ AND CABINm AS IlEQUIIlEO IY lOCAl GOVUNMENT AGENcrSHAllBE PROVIDED IlY GENERALCDtlTRACTOR AND INCLUDED lNCONTRAcr. I CENEJVJ. CONTRACTOR SHAll MAKE NO REVlS'ONS.ALTEIlATIONS OR CHANCES TO THE WORKAS SHOWN IN THE CONTJlAcr DOCUMENTS WITliOUT THE I'll/OR WlU1TEN A1'PROY AL OF THE A/l.CHITECT" ANDiOl!. OWNElU IlEPll.ESENTATIVL NO ADOmONA!.COrn PROM THE GENERAL COtmtAcroR St-U\U.lil! CONSIDWD N'lD THE WORK MAY liE IlEQ.UlllED TO BI! REMOVED WITliOUTSUCHAl'f'ROVAL IYAJlCHmcr. g GENERAL CONTIl.ACTOllSHALL "IlOVlDE THE BUILDING OfFICIAL W1TI1 A CEllTIFICATE OF cONSTRUcnON COt.ll'llANCE WITH ENERGY CQNSEIlVAT10N STANDAllOS UPON FINAL BUILDING DE'AATMEN'T' OOPECTlONS (WHERE Rl!QUIIlEDJ. 10 GENERAl. CONT'llAcrOR SHA1.L PlW'AltE THEFLOOll l..EVEl.AND SMOOiH AND PROVIDE FOR THE FIlUt-lG OF ALL "LOOR DRAINS, FLOOR SINKS OA.OTHI!.R SUCH DEPRESSIONS. CRACK.5 OR lIUl.ECUI..AlUTIESlNA.OOIISLAB II GENEP.AL CONT'llAcrollSHAll NlOVlDEACCW pmEL.5 FO'" ALL TIlADES AS REQUlR.EO &VCOOE. LOCATIONS TO BE APPROVED BY A/l.CNrTECT AND/OR O'WNERS aEPWE/II'TATNE PRIOR TO WCunON OFWORIC.. 11 CONTllACTOR IS TO VERIfY All DIMENS10N.5ANO EXISTING CONomONS ON niE SITE AND BE RESPONSJBLE fOR CONFIMIINC,u.lD COIlREI..J\.T1NGAll QlMNOT1ES AND DIMENSiONS. 5EU:CTlNG FABlUCATION I'ROCESSES AND TECHNIQUES OF CON5T1l.UCT1ON. COOllDlNAT1NG HIS/HEll WOlK WITli AlL OTHER Tll.ADl!5 AND i'ERfORMINC HIS/HEll WOllK IN AWE. COMrLffi, AND SATISfACTORY MANNEn. U ALl WALL DIMENSIONS AIlE F,O.F. TO f.O.f.. V.O.N I~ PROVIDE BLOCKlNGATWA1.!.S\t1HEllEIlEqVlllro FORSU'PraRTOfSHELVlNC. U All EXITS TO Ill!. OPENABU: FIlOM INSIDE WlTHOUTUSI!. OF A KEY. - ~ J - ()) q \J ~ q ZH Project T earn 0.... P.d,Co/f..llI:T= I~OOParkAv~... E"'.ry'lJIe,CA9~60S PhollC(510) 594.2101 Fu:('1O)59~-2lS0 Comaa: Audrey fLljiob CalI1lC~ S5BolllWRoad Swtt17 Fairfv:,CA94930 Pnono:(415j453-0700 FIX: (415)453.07S~ Conua; Mu Cmme Lu.d1I1fd~ Wcsurn InvC!<lIIC1\{ Marnlllernenl Co. P.O.BoI61120 P.doi\llO,CA9H06 Phone: (6~0) 322-'2722 Fu: (6~0) 322.2684 Conua: Charles M=h P",Jeer Ma.\laplm Ch"U1u<Company IHI4tbS"..c,S<e100 San Rmd. CA 94!lOI Phono: (415) 257-4227 Phone: (415) 257..4122 Comaa: David Il1la MccIu..a.1=l/Elecu!l::al:E.ap"" MlduudCooleyEncluon 1200Me<ropoh~Ccncrc 333So.....S..mchStrfel Min<lcpolls.MN 5H02 Phonoo: (612) 673--6834 Fu: (612) 339.83~4 Cont:lct:Riekl.e~n I..uul1onl'rAtchitca ICcnnethRodriCUoos&(P....ne..,Inc. IOSouch Third Scm:<. S..i.., 400 SilIIJoJC.CA95113 l'hone: (408) 993-0700 Fu.:(408)993.0707 Conaa:KevinJonc Sheet Index A1 Floor Pl~n A~ ~lIeCledCeJingPlan AS FinlshPlan A6 InreriDrElcv:nionl AG.l EncriorEIco:zdolL5 A7 DcaJi A7.1 Dewll KI Eqwprn.m<Pbn K2 Eqwprncn<Sd1edule Ml Mcd>anlc::1ISpe.:ilialioru M2 Mech:mlcalSpcdIiClClon. M3 HVACP!an&5chcduks M4 MethanicalOecaib MS Tid<:24Fonm PI P1umbingSpcc:"llorion. 1'2 Frcm Wl(er Piping PlanWure &( Venl.P1,n 1'3 B:Il" Iv.. Dome";' &( Wane E.nla~d Plana 1'4 Ri!erDialrarnand Dcgil. ASPI" Spceifiadonf EO ElectriQ/SyrnbolLcscndlll:Specifiation El E1eccricJUsh<inIlPlan E2 ElccnicJ Power & SY5ccm' Plan E3 ElecuialDe<olil. E.4 E1cccril:alR.lscrD~nm""dPanc4SchcduJa E, lowYolcageDiatlnm Eli CaH(Drn~nde14 Projecr Data PRO]!CT ADDRESS: 20807 SI....enl CmII BI.d.. Cupertino, CA APNII326-32-05I SCOPE Of WORK: INTERIOR. TENANT IMPROVEMENT. CODES: CBC2001. mLEI~.t-IEC 1999,CEC200I,Cf'ClOOI. CMC JOOl.UfC 1991. CUJUlFllOO, BUllDING 'nl'E: TYPE YoN, SPRlNKLERED . USE: RclJiJ OCCUPANCY GROUP: Jr"\,1\ EXIST1NGSP. 1.I.wSf(L~ {J or STORIES: 1 OCCUPANCY LOAD CAI.C1.1UTION: OCCUPANCY AREh LOAD FACTOR , OCCUPANTS RETAJL 3H\ " " SEATING ". " 2U EMPl.OYEE 162 200 I STOCK 340 'DD 2 TOTAL .. EXITS: Number of aiClccqwred : I E:.ll wld<h required: 36" mln Number af nlu plO"ided: 2 bi< widtb provided: I,c:..e, chao 36' Environment&! Health Nocc!: I. All food hems to come from an inspected and" ~pproved source. 2. A copy of the menll is inclllded with the equipment cur 5heeu. No po{enlially hazardous food! will be Jecved. F:lccory prepared and wrapped pastries and andies made d!Cwhere will be Jerved. No food will be rweated. No muJciple nep procening will be uscd. A5!embly of drink5 may Involve moon!; of milk (nored in refrige(2ron), Aavor !)'rups, aIld similar icenu. No ocherfoadswill bertUxal ora5sembJcd. OR C. GEN NTIl ~ OLORD E- EXlsTINC PURNISH INSTAlL l1!MAAlCS 1-; tj ~ ~ G!NI!IW. ". Co p" Ii Ii !1. S1GNAGI! "",riot.q,I....., .....-... KS, ,... ho In<<".. ...;._r". In<<,;",-n.",ou., mrrin,.I. """,,0' "",,'aMRINC ......cd 1NC1. BOL TINC TO rn~ ~w. llI1iU,f R.E s. IN HSCH.DULE HA/l.Dwm NEW a~ G,C ,. SEESHI!. A.3 I FOil ~lXTlJll.E SCHEDUlE ,Ie ""'i.'.l C1I' Of' ""'''' <f ..... ...rinlloN'D,.j A ...;r!.........IO<C<;on.(in. ,,) .....'utn... "',., ,.....I..n ." I....e "..,,""'......."'_ oln.....C ..,,"''''''''...''' .......'" <loa: .""..,.i. """ .oi'.....'" nor.. Inollnk/ou,01n> ., n,l...blneonllCCrion> ......ftlD".d.n'''..... AC<ond...oI' al. A ..-'n... n ..nnee..... "eu'; ..m , ""bllD<' bone"",n,o,..."", p ,on .1.61. .lrirl~..... d'muklO << "'""e'........ en ~s~.~~wI":,::.:f<rm'n"iDD drink "",""0''''.1..... ~ 03iJlllp'3l~!lj::JJlV CiWOJJ - 3 - " 0 l , .g , ., ., " " " .3 <8<El<El SIU.O tSJ sa I QDi.O [~, SLl' <<~16 '''''''l!'':l ......).01 I.-l .~ns P""ll UUl"'9 ~ cq~ t1cq cq '1 I' II jli ii G~ ~5 ~i ~~ "PO; ';; ~~ Eo -. \l i~ ~~ s ~ ~ ~ng ;'1 ~ ~ ~3 d ~8~~~~~ ~ 3 nm ~ · a ~m ~i~uuuu .t8E)E)E) z ~ ~ ~ ~ a ij ~ - ~ 3 ~~;:! - " ~~ a E . ~ .~~~~~~ ~O$.ii!.~ g~"'i;o(Ult ".~g.~~g ~~..~e5la;~ ~~~~~~~~ ;~~~f~~S ~m . . ;j ~ E)E)E)@)@@)@)@)@)@ . "~~ ~~ ~: ~~! ~~~; ~; ~ ~~~ ~~~~ i~~ ~g< Go~' ~~. ~ ~!l~' ~~~~ g.g ~ ~ &:!~ B~~~ :!5~ " 'Z~' d"g~ ~". ~ ~~ ~~5-1... i g a ~. 0 .d g t ~ ~ ~~o::! e~::i::! ~...~ ~ e~" Ei!t8 <'- .. ~:~~ e~i~ ~~~ S ..,~~~ 2i!ioo ... ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~ag ~~~~ $~g ~ ~~~~ ~~~~ ~~~ ~ ~~~i ~e::~ ~~i5 E5 ~~~E ~~~~~ ~Gi 6~ ~g~~ ~a~~~ ~~f'! ~ ~ ~ 3 ! ~ ~ ~ H ~ ~ H ~ } I~ II :~ '. . .~ m. a ~:;!g;;; h ~i~i ~:i! ~oEl~ ~~ ~!~~ ._ gO'. .~~ g~~; g~; ~~~~ ~~a~~5~~ l;~~~ga~ ~~h~m _"" ~!~~ai ;.j ~;h~o~~ " Q~'O"~: ~ 1~~!i~~; ~ gh,ga~~ : ~i~f::.J~~1;: ~ g,"m8~ . / 3 ~ ~ !1 < . ~ . gj ,1.. . ~ ~ ,0 < ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~t " " . , - - ~- , ~ ~ ~ Ii 'i 'i Ii ~a ~ ~ 'i , , , 1 ~ ~ Ii Ii Ii Ii 81 ~ i ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ < < a u u u ~~ ~~ b t ~ 't o~ B~ ~ ~ - ~ , - - < - . U~lcl JQOI.:1 'N . ~ :3 .~ ~~ ~~ ~~ H ~3 ~I' me ~~ ~~ ~s ., ai! ~~ 's ~~ .. ~1 ~ Ii "o~. '0 . ~~ ~ 9 ~~ ~ s ~~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ g ~~ q ~i L~ .0 . , . ;; -!; "~ S ~ 3 ~ ~ ~ ~ x a~ ~ ~ ~ g ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ,,~ .~ ~ i t ~ ~ [ ~ ~ ,g~ @) @@)@@)@@@ ~h ,," - ! h Ii '" " - " !W m I....... ...'r" ~ ~ . o o co . J M~ " ~~ K~~i . ~ !;~ ~~~- .a '. 3 .~~ a~ ,,~H E~ ~h~ a~ ~~e ~o ~ <. 5~"' 0 ~~ h~i , ~- ~~~~ ~~~i ~E '-r ., ~~ ~~ ~L" ~g ~Hh ". .~T 00 ~, ~~~ I . ~3. n .... ~ u a gg' 8 ~~~~ '"~I . : . .Sa n s~g~1 W!~ n ~ td~ aSS ~ . 0 <8 ...n<n'.....'ae_~ ."".,,,1\0,, '''",' ,..,~..., . ....,,,..... '.~~ ,"'..,.--- .........u...__..~ -.-- .,--..- ((P -/9 Exhibit E I l--., I . ':1 .. I~:L' . ~., ~"\:.~. -_..- ~-.. 1,.:-, .I C" ~ .- ..~j"~"':----=----,..-........-..h I ".' } }" - 'r--."tl-';.: ~\---""-_._-:.:: '.' . ~ ,...<.._--=------\..: " .' '.; ;~,.:..:.:;:.l,,~ ",; ;~....-.....". '-~ _..........~.,. ..."........ .'~ j":< ;, I ~ " j L.. /(p,.;J(j ---, . .- ._- - , \--rX-/' ~'-b.:~'s -'ilj"'-8f\. - .).j~.::,-::,- I \0 '\.) \ '1 -;\.." - - -:or " II I l..ft1n.'1".\f.Vi -(/'..,)...J~_:_:.:_.- , -" \ ~!:,::!~;!W C,,'.I:" ,}..:!i...;H __~~~ ~~l...::"\~).J t I ('h' e.F .t:'i..jrt )~~ \ ('~-.D ~r,,_, ,/ i-~"."~,, ':ir,r.e;; ,"- ,-r'--;-~~~I'-- ,4' //J~"'M"~'O~"" U ',I /71t=..,.'~~'~M"~'O ::;'7;; ~, ~~~~Elit~~t~ /.'//. _ r_..o.'l!~l:lior<~1!"lQ.IiiS TABULATIONS ~.bf. ACRES n.n~&e" $F) NEUJ RETAIL ARE.l.. l,-41 ACRE~ (63.8~4 ;;;;, New FLOOR AREA, ISl ACRES (",e:l~ e.FJ E>:I::.TlhI6 CI-IURCI-I PARKj~, ;.lb 5TAlL5 TOT.:l.l 5TANOAF<!D FARKIN::. ::m ST.ALLS COMFACT FARK:ING (-10>.). 1~6 5TALl5 ACCESSIBLE FAR!<ING. 1.5TALLS VAN ACCE5S. FARKJI.JC. 15TALLS n::) DAYCARE LITTLE vilLAGE ~ o <( o ex ~ Cl z -' --' W f- en I f- ex o z i EX~;~~A5(/.-./'"'\ 'l' '---"'[\~~~::''::OA~---I I ,I RJ$?.t..D \ :1 . I ;r. _, ~l~~/ ~~ ; 1> JL_____(~_=:_=____ II ---~ /~ \ ------ \'1 ~ \ ..../ -,- -- -- \;- .,__,) '__, I EXI5TN::;. E:U1LDII>G ~~~~1~~~1O~~~L~r;. :..-, ~~~;~~:L:;;~;;;~~ o~:'i:~T :!~7t:' ~~fif:.2,f:;~ 4~~- 1RI!~t AL.QI-l.:O ~~,.~u~ C;~ BLVO TO ElE lCt<DCoIl"L..lHE 1REE~, rr,. PRELIMINARY SITE PLAN I'.,~' STEVENS CREEK BOULEVARD - E)' \ N - EXISTING. BUilDING ! ~ WHOLE FOODS MARKET CUPERTINO, CALlFORl.IA SAND HILL PROPERTY COMPANY ~,.;. ..,:~. KoArchitecls, Inc. '---r.' ~.'~--"'" 9o[J HI!!. ".lfeSI' SuilS 1 F-. \9. ::":~.'~3Cl~O~4301 ': "~";;'.:-" I: 650 8~3 \8-l~ KEY "AP E9 flAl"'~ SlEJ1lTTAL ~~ H 1e'G:. fl,!t~ REsu:.nmAl OCTaeER H, 100;. F<EY15k'l./6PEi'!C.ITT ~~5"ffi'~;r!<\~ PLJ.t.I~ J<f5UeMln E9 a-' PREUMlNAR \ =- SITE PLAN -. & SHELL c::r -. SLOG PLAN ~ ." "r$ <P III III III III ~ III I GU I I, " I ..--: II I II I:; . (FUTURE SECURIT'f GRILLE LAYOUT REMOVED. GRILLE TO BE SUBMITTED TO CITY AT LATER DATE UNDER SEPARATE SUBMITTAL.! 13 '" ....... ~ , N N 188'-"''' 124'-2" WMO~ ~OO\?$ BUILDING ONE: FROFOSED ONE- 4 TWO-STORY BUILDING (OCCUFANCY GROUP M WITH MINOR ACCESSORY USE B) FIRST FLOOR = 102,432 S.F. (INTERIOR FLUS MARKET HALL CANOFY) +21&4.&8' SEE civiL Dll.l::.S. LANDING +21&2.&8' 21_611 4e> 1_'4 II 1&'-1" LANDING +21&2.&8' +21&4.58' SEE CIVIL Dll.l::.S. p~ffZ.'A~ DtJ~ ","n D '" 3 ,.1,1.4 I\) -' N ttt"~ t t; rJ1e;(L. ~ I\) ~ <n I\) '" .~ o C Q G ~ @ [} ~ ~ ~ [[ @: ~ [Ii ~ ~ [B] ~ ~ ~ E IBIT 4; ~ff =~:S~~ --.II!Io.:..n:u.-..a:,...... 0::1 O(-_.=~~~~-.-K;rwlr l ., , "'-9l.U It , >~.~1r ~~ji"':..--=~.:rA\./ ....-..~~~ I X , ., , " __,J.'''-'._ .: _, ~~. 1/ . \-.- "-"......:)ocl,1tII_~..'+ ~....~~f\._...::."".. -\ .~..,.., -.0"'" e~1~ ......0'"' - .......... , ,...!>-.. to,. . . 4,t.X! W' i.:t4U' ~"" :':4~') ',/ ~ ~_.-.;h" / /1 ~}/:./--=-:~~'__"~U , II ,( -"-~.<,.jo''''''!M.''''--- I~ 1.' / ~~..--~ ,/ I; ,I r--""'~-'~'-"" , 'j' .------ ~~ / ./ / ./ i I /',......lIf!~~~.,.~ ./.l "r...'"":>" '.1" // DIlimffj'!/ IP 1 ! : ' I r i H':J" ' , '/ .' I ,,. W!+' ~.t"~'I./I',(" ...' 'm'f/; I I '~I, ~.~ 1m' i / .', .~; .,j.. I ""'l,~l.. ,1_, --'j "'-' '-'" i '~I" " 'T'T .~ j j : 1 / I; '!.l I; r r ~ I , -I /! :'" ~_....: J . ,./ f - r~""'" i 1-921Ir:l, ,tWj' . II",", 1lW.-U-' 'I ' ... . . Ii,' ~ r ; ; i I! < , . 14 (;.. .-:1~_.;,-<.... "...... --b,-,;-,~>..: .~..l! ,",", J;.---";"\';rm' 'Y'riii,-l\vln-'I-Il'" ,,"' I ! ' , , , , , I , , , , 1'\1, . T I \ . . : ~ \~:::.::.:. l' ..........~....,... it:~'d'U'I,"J:'I.,,~'il.!':; , l....,~.._,~~^".!'; '. , i~' Yi i III i i Il!, 'I ' I ; ~.....~. , f1'.....:xIP~."ooOC ~~. ,..H>~....,.' I'll!" -~' 'I . ',' . ~ ~F7 :: ! It I _lot"",?" ~ 1!;OO"~il'G "..u. !It..ntpol ---~. ..f'...._...~~. ----.:..-..... I ' \. . " .....~-~.."""","..,I'>.-. ....~__l..--:......,............"'"" ___"-_:0", "._. ._1' (_~,..,-~""'..,..-. 'i.~_..~ . ----- ...,.,1....._ioiP....~.,__ .,~~", STEve",. CRlf>. 9 ."Aft!) - \'- "........ i~j_. :>>!~..!tltit=t C, 'iH ;;...d:-A1 ..' . '.' I'i~J.CMril._ ~IL1-1 el- l'. I" fl \j r'- \......Y" ,'r.M'l ,.. .'_"',_<r_//<' . , " ""11" i) o '" o '" " Z ..J .... UJ ... '" r ... '" o z .' " " .._~: - , i: i i I: i II HOGE, FENTON ~ JONES & ApPEL, INC. cc J/Z6 I /) ~ #/& Attorneys at Law I San Jose I Pleasanton I East Palo Alto I Hollister Geoffrey C Etnire 408.947.2490 gce@hogefenton.com March 20, 2007 ~XHIBIT Kris Wang, Mayor Patrick Kwong, Vice Mayor Richard Lowenthal, City Council Dolly Sandoval, City Council Orrin Mahoney, City Council City of Cupertino 10300 Torre Avenue Cupertino, CA 95014 Re: City Council Meeting on March 20, 2007 Agenda Item #16 Appeal of Modification of use permit for Peet's Coffee 20807 Stevens Creek Boulevard Our File No.: PENDING00077645 Dear Mayor Wang and Council members: We have been retained by Stevens Creek Office Center Associates, LP ("SCOCA"), to represent the SCOCA with regard to that office complex commonly known as Stevens Creek Office Center ("Office Center"). We do not represent Peet's Coffee. We also do not represent Stevens Creek Retail Associates, LLC ("Retail Associates"), the owner of the property on which Peet's and Panera Bread are located. SCOCA always has been and wishes to continue to be cooperative with the City and its efforts to improve the community. In fact, SCOCA is aware that improvements to its immediate neighborhood, including improvements in pedestrian access, eventually do add value to the Office Complex and its tenants. The Office Center is now over 30 years old and SCOCA is considering how best to upgrade and update the Office Center in the coming years. With plans for upgrading the property, SCOCA will also submit design changes in both parking and pedestrian access. Having said that, we also believe very strongly that, at this point in time, a pedestrian access between Whole Foods and the Office Center is a very bad planning idea. Using this route, a pedestrian leaving Whole Foods and going through the proposed pedestrian access would have to walk past the Whole Food loading docks, only to fmd himself or herself in an office parking \ \HFJAFILE \NDrive \PEND INGOOO77645 \Let \249365.doc San Jose Office I 60 South Mal-ket Street, SUite 1400, San Jose, California 95113-2396 phone 408.287.950 I fax 408.287.2583 www.hogefenton.com Kris Wang, Mayor and City of Cupertino Council Members March 20, 2007 Page 2 lot designed for parking, not commuting pedestrians. There are no sidewalks, no crosswalks and no pedestrian lanes --- and no obvious route to Peet's. It is clear, from even a short visit to the site, that persons wanting to travel between Whole Foods and Peet's would use the sidewalk along Stevens Creek Boulevard. If providing a pedestrian commuter route between Whole Foods and Peet's is not the planning idea, if the planning idea is to allow tenants in the Office Center to have access to Whole Foods, then there is no nexus with the Peet's use permit, as discussed below. Sand Hill Properties, the developer of the Whole Foods site, opposed the idea of the pedestrian access both because it does not make good planning sense and because Sand Hill Properties does not want to incur the liabilities that are inherent in having such an access. We ask that the City Council deny the appeal, based on the following facts: I. Lack of nexus. There is no nexus between the changing Peet's opening time to 5:30 a.m. and a need for the creation of a pedestrian access between Whole Foods and the Office Center. The lack of nexus is documented in the Staff Report for the Planning Commission meeting of January 9, 2007, which notes no pedestrian impact or needs. 2. Different ownership. The Office Center and the Peet's property are held by different legal owners. Imposing a condition on SCOCA because of an application by Retail Associates and Peet's is not legally permissible. 3. Whole Foods. If Whole Foods is bringing a condition to this area that requires the creation of a pedestrian access, then Whole Foods should be responsible for the creation of this access and its cost. The cost of installing this access on the Office Center side is not insubstantial and neither Whole Foods nor Peet's is willing to pay that cost. SCOCA wishes to support Peet's in its application for an earlier opening time. However, if the Council wishes to sustain the appeal, it is our unders,tanding that Retail Associates will withdraw it application to amend the Peet's use permit, KrisWang,Mayorand City of Cupertino Council Members March 20, 2007 Page 3 In the event that the City Council rejects the appeal, SCOCA will work with Whole Foods toward informal arrangements that assure good pedestrian access and neighborly relations. Sincerely, HOGE, FENTON, JONES & APPEL, INC. Geoffrey C. Etnire GCE: lr Cc: John V olckman