Loading...
Attachment 09Jocelyn Shoopman Subject: RE: Napa's Application From: Tim Nelson <tim@ruralsupply.com> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 8:16 AM To: Steven Leonardis; Marcia Jensen; Rob Rennie; Marico Sayoc; BSpector Subject: Napa's Application My name is Tim Nelson, my family owns Rural Supply Hardware at 110 S.Santa Cruz Ave. I have worked here since 1974 and for 37 of those years we were the tenant in the building Napa's is looking at. Landlord greed (undeniable as you look at the number of vacancies in town) forced us out and the building in it's odd off- street location has been vacant for the last 6 years. If you look at the drawings submitted by Hapa's you can see that there is a property line dividing our lot from the lot containing 114 S.Santa Cruz Ave.(the Napa's proposed location). While the property line is real and not in question here, it is just an invisible line through the middle of the lot and you can see where customers could be confused as to where to park for what business. We have worked with the Spa to create signage at each spot but it doesn't always work. We are constantly chasing out, and occasionally towing customers and employees from surrounding businesses.We have made it work but it does take a lot of time and energy; and some hard feelings from those who seem to think it's a public lot there for all. The Spa clients typically fill their lot by noon most days so I'm not sure where Hapa's thinks their customers or their employees will park. We certainly won't be sharing our spots as they are for our customers while shopping at our store! I say that but I know what will happen, when people drive in and see a spot they take it, after all it's just one, right, they're not hurting anybody. All this is before #1 Broadway even opens in the evening, and they often fill the lot as the Spa closes, it's a bit of a dance but it works. Now along comes Hapa's, with a proposal to remove 4 parking spaces while creating the need for more parking, not less. I don't know how often you park south of Main St. but by 9 am all possible public or all -day spots are taken. We see that the small public lot between the post office and HI 17 is now a bus pick-up spot for LG High School so add them to the mix. We have been sharing a lot of information with the residents in the neighborhood and they have their own valid concerns about hours, noise, traffic, congestion, etc and they will be sharing those with you so I will focus on the parking issue. There is simply not enough available parking to even consider adding an 88-seat bar/restaurant; this is just not the right location, ask them to look elsewhere! I'm not a civil engineer or a traffic consultant but 45 years of working here give me unique insight as to the parking needs at this end of town. I don't envy you and the traffic nightmare you inherited with this job, we all know what the last few summers have been like, but please don't make things worse by allowing a business with a need for so much parking to open where there is none available. I know people throw around the concept of the parking district created many years ago, but the fact is most of those spots/lots were never created; they don't exist and we should not be held hostage to unfulfilled promises. Between Rural Supply and the Spa we have more than 100 years of serving the needs of the folks of Los Gatos. Please don't jeopardize two proven businesses, their employees livelihoods, and the revenue created all those years by allowing this CUP application to pass. There are already at least four other places south of main st. to get a cold beer, do we really need another? Thank You, Tim Nelson ATTACHMENT 9 Jocelyn Shoopman Subject: RE: change of CUP at 114 S. Santa Cruz Ave From: Gail Randolph <gailrandolph42j: mail.com> Sent: Friday, February 15, 2019 3:10 PM To: Council <Council@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Re: change of CUP at 114 S. Santa Cruz Ave 42 Broadway Los Gatos, CA 95030 Los Gatos Town Council Los Gatos, CA 95030 Town Council, I am opposed to changing the the CUP at 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue, for Hapa's Brewing Company, or any use that is incompatible (ie: noise producing, etc.) with the Broadway neighborhood. This proposed project is problematic because it is right next to apartments and a home. And, as demonstrated in the sound study for the Toll House courtyard, sound bounces into the neighborhood (and the Toll House location was farther away and had a wall between their proposed site and where people live.) Even though Happa's proposes shorter hours every day of the week, we know that a use permit is for 11 to 11 and goes with the land. If Napa's has a short shelf life, the next tenant would be allowed maximum hours. At least two families at the lower end of Broadway have small children with earlier bedtimes. Soon they will be of school age and need a peaceful environment in which to to do their homework. We need to think of the future when we make these lasting plans. And, do -we want to lose a tree? Can we lose even one parking spot? Napa's proposes to host 30 people inside and 50 outside. There will be games and all of those patrons laughing and talking. My experience of Los Gatos Bar and Grill and #1 Broadway earlier was that there was a lot of hooting, too. Add music, and "Oh, my!" Hapa's, and the CUP that would have to be changed is incompatible with families who are living their lives here, now and in generations to come. I wish the fellows well, but please no change to the CUP. Most sincerely, Gail Randolph Jocelyn Shoopman Subject: RE: 114 South Santa Cruz Avenue application for a pub On Feb 16, 2019, at 6:36 PM, "pstepovich@comcast.net" <pstepovich@comcast.net> wrote: Dear Mayor Leonardis, Vice Mayor Jensen and Council members Mr.Rennie, Ms. Sayoc and Ms.Spector, For many years my family has owned 110 South Santa Cruz Avenue and our tenants Ken and Tim Nelson have operated Rural Supply out of the location for a long time. Rural Supply is a unique business and has saved thousands of trips on the freeway to places like Home Depot and Lowes. One of the main draws, other than Rural carries almost everything for a weekend project, and helpful and friendly service, is the fact there is on -site parking owned by us. It is easy to park, pop in, buy what you need with no hassle looking for a place to park. It is my concern and my tenants concern that a bar/restaurant at the rear of our property would make it almost impossible to save our parking spaces for Rural Supply's customers. People as you all know, like to park as close to where they are going as possible. Our property is private and cannot be used as a driveway for patrons to enter and leave. If you do approve it, I am also opposed to using existing parking spaces for dining. As many spaces as possible should be reserved for patrons. I feel the only way my tenants can be secure their parking spaces are free for their customers is to install a fence between the two properties with a gate that would be left unlocked for emergency entrance. The business hours of the bar from 11:00 am to 11:00 pm would fall into hours after my tenants have closed their business for the day. I do not want our parking lot to be used for the patrons of the bar. Our insurance doesn't cover people who have been drinking alcohol to be parking and exiting through our property. I'm sure the applicants are nice people and run a nice place but 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue is simply an inappropriate location for a bar. I thank you in advance for your thoughtful consideration of what this could mean now, and down the road if this bar failed and another one opened up. It could cause a very big hardship for my tenants. Respectfully submitted, Patricia Stepovich pstepovich(a comcast.net Jocelyn Shoopman From: Warren Ristow <wristow@gmail.com> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 10:29 AM To: Council; Rob Rennie; Marico Sayoc; Marcia Jensen; BSpector; Steven Leonardis Subject: Hapa's application for 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue Attachments: HapaApp.docx Attached please find our letter for the Town Council meeting Tuesday, 2/2/19. This is for Item 11. Conditional Use Permit Application U-18-020. Project Location: 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue. Property Owner: 102 S. Santa Cruz, LP. Applicant: Brian Edwards. Requesting approval for a restaurant with beer and wine service (Hapa's Brewing Co.) on property zoned C-2. APN 510-45- 061. Thank you, Maria and Warren Ristow To the Los Gatos Town Council and staff, Regarding the application for a CUP to create a taproom and restaurant at 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue, my husband and I are completely opposed. Our opposition has nothing to do with the applicants and everything to do with the location and proposed change of use. This building, long -utilized as the feed and supply storage for Rural Supply Hardware, is in the rear of a parking lot, immediately adjacent to an apartment building and a single-family residence on Broadway. Use as a store shed was an ideal use for that location. Over the past few years, the former landlord ejected Rural Supply, fixed up the space for retail, then sold the property which included the shed, and the building occupied by Number One Broadway and the Spa. Now the present landlord is looking to create a restaurant and bar in the former shed (dubbed by the neighbors as "the Shack in the Back"). This is not reasonable. We support our neighbors on Broadway and the businesses sharing the parking lot where the shed is located in opposition to this application. Location: • There are residences immediately adjacent to this building and the proposed 49-person outdoor patio. This is a massive change of use that no one who "chooses to live downtown" should expect. There are plenty of other places the applicant can pursue. (Who wants their next -door neighbor to host 50 of their closest friends for a yard party 7 nights a week?) • Broadway and Main Street residents have already had issues with: 1. LG Bar and Grill back patio and stairs 2. Number One Broadway when the side balcony was in use by patrons, and the side doors open 3. Toll House use of outdoor patio and amplified music • Every ONE of the issues listed above took time and energy and expense and work to ameliorate the noise issues. And each of these establishments are much further from residences than the Shack in the Back plus have additional infrastructure for noise attenuation. • We see NO WAY for Hapa's to operate in the proposed location without detrimental impact on several neighbors. Applicant: • The business may last 6 months, 6 years or 20 years in this location. But the CUP goes with the land, belongs to the landlord and entitles the next tenant(s). • The applicant, Hapa, sounds like a great business. I attended the Planning Commission meeting as well as the neighborhood meet and greet Derek Tam and Brian Edwards hosted. • We have no problem with this business, but the owners and their plan are immaterial to this application, as far as I'm concerned. • This is all about a CUP in an untenable location. • The focus needs to be on the long-term change of use for this location, with the impact on the nearby businesses and residents. • ANY plan to create an outdoor patio for 50 people, with music and noise, abutting private residences SHOULD BE DENIED. Conclusion: • This is NOT a rejection of Hapa. Los Gatos has other locations, and Hapa has lots of support to come to Los Gatos. We are sure they will eventually find the right place. • This is a concern for how we allow quiet, passive uses in the buffer zone between entertainment districts and residences to remain in place. • Walking through town, we see many office or retail uses just adjacent to residences where we know others would scream "foul" to a noisy outdoor patio sharing a six-foot fence with their formerly quiet yard. We do NOT want to see the site of the Happy Dragon, for instance, become a restaurant and bar, with an outdoor patio against residential yards. This is just one example. • Please DENY this application. A denial would NOT be a rejection of the applicant, but a denial of this specific use at this specific location. • If and when Hapa's applies to an appropriate location in Los Gatos, we will fully support them! Thank you, Maria and Warren Ristow 85 Broadway Jocelyn Shoopman Subject: RE: Town Council meeting Feb 19 regarding CUP, 114 S Santa Cruz From: Larry Lenhart <larry@larrylenhart.com> Sent: Monday, February 18, 2019 8:57 PM To: Council <Council@Iosgatosca.gov>; Rob Rennie <RRennie@losgatosca.gov>; Marico Sayoc <MSavoc@Iosgatosca.Rov>; Marcia Jensen <MJensen@Iosgatosca.gov>; BSpector <BSpector@losgatosca.gov>; Steven Leonardis <SLeonardis@losgatosca.gov>; Planning <Planning@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Town Council meeting Feb 19 regarding CUP, 114 S Santa Cruz Attached please find a letter from neighbors on Broadway who stand firmly against the Conditional Use Permit Application U-18-020. Project Location: 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue. Property Owner: 102 S. Santa Cruz, LP. Applicant: Brian Edwards. Requesting approval for a restaurant with beer and wine service (Hapa's Brewing Co.) on property zoned C-2. APN 510-45-061. Many of us will attend and look forward to addressing the Town Council meeting Tuesday, Feb 19th, item 11. Best, Larry Lenhart, 30 Broadway Tom Richards, 62 Broadway Gary Zucconi, 25 Broadway Dixie Fisher, 74 Broadway Kim Karloff, 30 Broadway Lori Baker, 45 Broadway Andy Law, 29 Broadway Lauren Shelly, 62 Broadway Gail Randolph, 42 Broadway Claire LeClair, 46 Broadway Brad Forcier, 45 Broadway Mike and Gillian Verga, 50 Broadway To the Los Gatos Town Council and staff, We, the undersigned Broadway, neighbors, stand firmly against the approval for the CUP at 114 South Santa Cruz Avenue — Hapa's Brewery. This unprecedented CUP would not allow us to the reasonable use and enjoyment of our property and would be detrimental to the health, safety and welfare of the residents, including children and elderly, and is contrary to the public interest. A bar, with outdoor seating, over 250 feet from a main road, with no physical sound attenuation structures, and zero feet from single-family residences with children is unheard of in Los Gatos. In fact, it is so far out of the norm that it is a bizarre and most certainly an unprecedented action. We know that this CUP would be detrimental in the following ways: • Noise. With no sound attenuation structure and zero feet from single family residences, any outdoor conversations would be well over the Los Gatos noise ordinance. Any games, music, or entertainment on top of outdoor conversations would be substantially over the noise ordinance. • Parking. Parking is already limited. Residents cannot find street parking in the afternoon and it is much worse on weekends, when Broadway parking is not limited by time. • Traffic. With limited parking, erratic traffic on Broadway will increase as bar goers try to find a spot. Given the number of children residing on Broadway, playing on sidewalks and riding bikes, this is extremely dangerous. • Poor behavior. As we have seen for many years, the bars in Los Gatos bring poor and often illegal activity to the street of Broadway. This includes urination on the street on residences fences, bushes and front lawns. Vomit on sidewalks. Broken fencing, loud yelling, trespassing, trash and broken bottles. • Home value. Having a bar in your backyard will most likely negatively impact value for all in the Broadway zone. • Children. There are children playing, reading and doing homework on the other side of the fence from the proposed location. The children will hear every word of the outdoor patrons of the bar and feel the vibration of every outdoor drinking game. This is a dreadful way to raise children in the town of Los Gatos. We stand united and firmly against the approval of this CUP and any approval of a new bar that is zero feet from a single-family residence on Broadway, the oldest and historically significant street in Los Gatos. Respectfully, the Broadway neighborhood including: Larry Lenhart, 30 Broadway Tom Richards, 62 Broadway Gary Zucconi, 25 Broadway Dixie Fisher, 74 Broadway Kim Karloff, 30 Broadway Lori Baker, 45 Broadway Andy Law, 29 Broadway Lauren Shelly, 62 Broadway Gail Randolph, 42 Broadway Claire LeClair, 46 Broadway Brad Forcier, 45 Broadway Mike and Gillian Verga, 50 Broadway 114 S. Santa Cruz Ave CUP by the numbers 250 Feet NO 4 Spaces 0 Feet 50 Seats Feet From Sant Cruz .Ave, Main or University Average Los Gatos Bar is 0-15 Feet From Main Road Sound Attenuation? Most Los Gatos Bar's have some barrier (building, parking lot, etc.) Off -Street Parking Sec. 29.10.150. Requires 1 space per 300 sqft 1800/300 = 6 Feet From Residential Average Los Gatos Bar is 591 Feet From Residential Outdoor Entertainment Of 44 Restaurants/Bars only 2 have outdoor entertainment* *The Toll House, The Palms Jocelyn Shoopman Subject: RE: Favorable Response to Hapas Brewery From: Chuck Oliver <cpoliverl@hotmail.com> Sent: Tuesday, February 19, 2019 10:55 AM To: Monica Renn <mrenn@IosFatosca.gov>; Chuck Oliver <cpoliverl@hotmail.com> Subject: Favorable Response to Hapas Brewery Good Morning Monica... My name is Chuck Oliver...I currently manage Number One Broadway in Los Gatos.T I have been in the bar/restaurant business for 46 years. I am for Hapas Brewery. They have a location in downtown Willow Glen which is very successful. With the closing of Los Gatos Bar and Grill and Hannigan's over the last couple of years, Los Gatos has become an undestination... patrons are going to Santana Row, Campbell and San Pedro Square. We need to keep Los Gatos vibrant. In the year I have been in Los Gatos, there have been no noise or parking issues. I think Hapas Brewery will be a great neighbor for everybody in Los Gatos. Thank you, Chuck Oliver Chuck Oliver 408.499.9900 831.477.5875 cpoliverl@ hotmail.com Realtor® CalBRE 00867633 DAVID LYNG REAL ESTATE From: John Shepardson <shepardsonlaw@me.com> Date: February 15, 2019 at 10:44:37 PM PST To: Steven Leonardis <SLeonardis@losgatosca.gov>, Marcia Jensen <MJensen@losgatosca.gov>, Bspector <BSpector@losgatosca.gov>, Marico Sayoc <msayoc@losgatosca.gov>, Rob Rennie <rrennie@losgatosca.gov>, Laurel Prevetti <LPrevetti@losgatosca.gov>, Robert Schultz <RSchultz@losgatosca.gov> Subject: Comments for Town Council Meeting 2/19/19 Dear Mayor Steve Leonardis, Other Council Members Marcia Jensen, Barbara Spector, Marico Sayoc, and Rob Rennie, Town Manager Laurel Prevetti, and Town Counsel Robert Schultz: The following are my thoughts for your consideration on council agenda items for the scheduled 2/19/19 meeting: 1. Annexation FISCAL IMPACT: Once the annexation is certified by the State Board of Equalization, the Town will receive approximately 9.6 percent of the property taxes. What is the cost of services on an approximate basis? My understanding is town services for residential property exceeds the revenue received. If we don't have the approximate cost of the services, how can we fairly consider the fiscal impact? Should we be taking on more net debt obligations at this time? Would that be fiscally prudent? 2. Budget Use additional funds for unfunded liabilities and fire protection? 3. RESOLUTION 2019- DRAFT RESOLUTION OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS ADOPTING A COMPLETE STREETS POLICY FOR THE TOWN OF LOS GATOS WHEREAS, the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (known as AB 32) sets a mandate for the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions in California, and the Sustainable Communities and Climate Protection Act of 2008 (known as SB 375) requires emissions reductions through coordinated regional planning that integrates transportation, housing, and land -use policy, and achieving the goals of these laws will require significant increases in travel by public transit, bicycling, and walking; and Looks like a winner. 4. PPW Job Number 18-811-9901 Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project (Rubber Cape Seal) A. Authorize contract award to the project low bidder, American Pavement Systems, in an amount not to exceed $1,053,800, including a ten percent construction contingency. B. Authorize staff to execute potential change orders within the ten percent construction contingency. C. Recognize $414,061 of project reimbursements and authorize a revenue and expenditure budget adjustment of $414,061 to the Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project. D. Authorize a revenue decrease of $178,000 in Gas Tax revenue to the Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project. E. Authorize a revenue increase of $10,650 in GFAR revenue to the Annual Street Repair and Resurfacing Project. Staff Report Attachment 1- Street List for Project 18-811-9901 Can we seal with cool colors? White, off-white, light green? Get the seal and reduction in street ambient air temperature? Less use of air conditioning? Enhanced property values and tax revenues? Creatively address Climate Change? 5. Conditional Use Permit Application U-18-020. Project Location: 114 S. Santa Cruz Avenue. Property Owner: 102 S. Santa Cruz, LP. Applicant: Brian Edwards. The promoters, as I recall from reading about them, demonstrated a tremendous work ethic on the sports field and in the classroom at LGHS. Supposing they bring that same ethic to their enterprise, they seem poised to benefit the town citizenry. I can envision them being respectful of the nearby residents. 6. Budget If the VanNada/Koen concept for paying down unfunded liabilities will not jeopardize the town's financial reserves to an imprudent level, it seems to me it is worthy of careful and thorough review. Their coming up with creative ways to deal with the liabilities is to be lauded. I feel the town citizenry owes them a "debt of gratitude". As you can see, both Scenario's 1+2 have their advantages. Scenario 1 requires a $10,895,100 ADP but has a $18,956,000 overall reduction to pension liabilities over 26 years. Scenario 2 was an Alternative Mr. Koen devised if the $10,895,100 was too high for some of you. Scenario 2 requires a $7,006,000 ADP, but reduces pension liabilities by $8,795,000 over 14 years with 61 % coming in the first 6 years and 87% within the first 10 when we need pension reductions the most. We believe that the $11 million can come from the three sources: 1. Excess Capital Project Reserve 2. Excess Internal Service Funds 3. Proceeds from the sale of surplus property Total $6,500,000 $3,000,000 $1,900,000 $11,400,000 In addition to the above, the Town could elect to use some of the current 115 Pension Trust balan to help fund an ADP. For example, if the Town elected to withdraw $2.5m from the current 115 Pension Trust balance, the Town would only need to find an incremental $4.5m from the source listed above for Scenario 2. We hope you find this helpful. We feel that the most important thing Council can do would be to make as big a payment to Ca1PERS as possible. I think the above should help you feel better that I we'll not be shooting ourselves in the financial foot. With either scenario, there will be annual cash flows in terms of annual payment reductions to the present and future budgets. Our interest is to I provide information to the Council and the Staff that helps with the overall success of the Town byl thinking of creative ways to extricate ourselves from the pension debt. Jak VanNada Phil Koen Respectfully, John Shepardson, Esq.