Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRes 01-112 CUP 01-15 Wessman CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT I. TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council II. REQUEST: Consideration of an appeal to a decision of the Planning Commission approving a request by John Wessman dba Wessman Development Company on behalf of Robert Wolff for a conditional use permit for the addition of 1 ,260 square feet through enclosure of the existing breezeway, approval to permit a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop on the corner and a parking adjustment to facilitate the above two requests. The property is at the northeast corner of El Paseo and San Pablo, 73-520 El Paseo. III. APPLICANT: John Wessman Wessman Development Company 1555 South Palm Canyon Drive, Suite G-106 Palm Springs, CA 92264 IV. APPELLANT: Eltinge & Graziadio Development Co. c/o Roemer, Harnik & Nethery, LLP, Attorneys 45-025 Manitou Drive, Indian Wells, CA 92210 V. CASE NO: CUP 01-15 VI. DATE: October 25, 2001 VII. CONTENTS: A. Staff Recommendation B. Discussion VIII. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft Resolution No. 01-112 B. Planning Commission Minutes involving Case No. CUP 01-15 C. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2094 D. Planning Commission Staff Report dated September 18, 2001 E. Related maps and/or exhibits , STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 A. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That City Council deny the appeal and affirm the Planning Commission action. B. DISCUSSION: 1 . CURRENT REQUEST AND PARKING CALCULATION: The applicant seeks two approvals through this application. First, the applicant requests approval to enclose the existing breezeway and use it for general retail use. This would add 1 ,262 square feet to the center. Second, the applicant seeks approval of a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop in the corner unit where Trio currently exists. The plan provides seating for 20 on an outdoor patio and 21 inside. Through this CUP request, the applicant also requests a parking adjustment to permit the above two items without providing additional parking. Parking: The proposed 1 ,262 square foot addition for retail purposes has a code requirement of five spaces (i.e., 4/1 ,000 square feet). The conversion of 1 ,491 square feet at the corner from retail to restaurant use creates an additional code parking requirement of nine spaces (i.e., restaurant @ 10 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet = 15 spaces less six spaces already provided at retail standard 4/1 ,000). As proposed, this request results in a code required addition of 14 parking spaces (five-retail + nine-Starbucks). 2 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 2. PLANNING COMMISSION ACTION: The Planning Commission at its September 18, 2001 meeting, on a 5-0 vote, approved the conditional use permit and parking adjustment subject to conditions. Among the conditions is a requirement that Starbucks employees park in the Garden's parking structure, that employees be notified in writing of this requirement, and that the applicant provide a parking management plan to be approved and monitored by the Director of Community Development. 3. CONCERNS: Prior to the Planning Commission hearing we received a call and a letter from the property manager of the center to the east who expressed concern that the lack of parking at the Starbucks location will further impact parking at her center. Ms. Herrera noted that at lunch time Doug Arrango's patrons spill over into her center, specifically the parking area behind the former Beer Hunter. October 2, 2001 , the City Clerk received this timely appeal on behalf of Eltinge & Graziadio Develoment Co. The appeal reiterates the concerns raised by Ms. Herrera and notes that the Planning Commission approved the request without a parking study and that inadequate notice was provided to the appellant for the Planning Commission hearing due to an address change. 4. RESPONSE: The parking concerns raised by Ms. Herrera in her letter of September 17, 2001 were discussed at length by Planning Commission, see pages 22- 24, 27 and 28 of September 18, 2001 Planning Commission minutes. Planning Commission noted that through the combination of existing on- site and off-site parking, the project can comply with the city parking requirements. This type of solution meets the overall intent of the Palm Desert Commercial Core Area Specific Plan. This project will improve the 3 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 pedestrian environment on El Paseo. The 14-space parking deficiency can be addressed in a positive manner through the use of excess spaces built at the Gardens parking structure. This solution is consistent with the goals and policies of the Core Area Specific Plan. Specifically commission noted that the retail center to the east was built with a significant parking adjustment to fill in the commercial frontage on El Paseo and remove the view of the back end of Jensen's. Commissioner Campbell noted that in her 15 years on the street there has always been ample parking in this area. Staff would note that following Ms. Herrera's phone call of September 12, 2001 , staff visited the parking lot east of Doug Arrango's during the lunch hour on September 13 and 18, 2001 . On the 13th there were three open spaces and on the 18th two spaces were open. Doug Arrango's was not open for lunch in September. The vehicles parked in this area were construction vehicles probably connected with the building remodel at the former Beer Hunter which was converted to a cleaners. Staff drove through the same parking lot on Wednesday, October 10, 2001 during the lunch hour and there were ten available parking spaces. The construction vehicles were gone and the cleaners in the former Beer Hunter location was open. Doug Arrango's was open for lunch on October 10, 2001 . Planning Commission action approving the CUP on September 18, 2001 included a condition requiring Starbuck's employees to park in the Garden's parking lot and that employees be notified in writing of the mandate to park in the structure. Mr. Wessman agreed to the condition and has been working on the required parking management plan. The Planning Commission notice was sent to the address shown in the assessor records provided by First American Title. Ms. Herrera was eventually made aware of the hearing and contacted staff by phone on Wednesday, September 12, 2001 and submitted written comments 4 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 which were received September 18, 2001 . The phone comments and the written comments were available for Planning Commission consideration. Notice of this hearing was sent to Roemer, Harnik and Nethery LLP and to Ms. Herrera at the address provided on her letter of September 17, 2001 . 5. BACKGROUND: Rancho San Pablo was constructed in late 1978, early 1979. The project included a total of 18,528 square feet on two floors. The buildings front on El Paseo, San Pablo and Highway 1 1 1 and were to be used for retail and office purposes. This project provided 77 onsite parking spaces. A restaurant was originally approved in November 1980 with 4,853 square feet of interior area and a 826 square foot outdoor dining patio. It was also limited to dinner only. The approval authorized the removal of three parking spaces. The outdoor dining area was never utilized nor were the parking spaces removed. In November 1982 the operator at that time (Palm Tree Restaurant) requested permission to serve lunch. The commission granted approval for a two-year trial period. No parking problems were noted during the period although the restaurant never had a successful lunch business. In May of 1988 the restaurant was taken over by Dominick Mancuso who also made an unsuccessful attempt at lunch operation. August 7, 1990 the Planning Commission approved the enclosure of the outdoor patio thereby adding 845 square feet for a total of 5,700 square feet of restaurant area. The restaurant Cup allows it to be open for lunch and dinner. The approval was at least partially based on the fact that the Ahmanson (Gardens) development agreement required a "parking lot which will contain 200 spaces in excess of their base parking requirement. This 5 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 supply should provide adequate overflow parking for the entire central El Paseo area." The approval conditioned the restaurant to "institute a mandatory employee parking program utilizing the Ahmanson parking." Essentially then we have a 18,528 square foot commercial center with a 5,700 square foot restaurant, retail, offices and a dental office. 6. ANALYSIS: The building addition will take place within the existing building envelope. The corner unit will be renovated but not expanded other than the outdoor seating area. There are no issues with respect to setbacks, height or coverage. The issue with this request is parking. Given the previous approvals, the mix of uses in the center and in the nearby area, is there enough parking available to allow the expansion and the new restaurant use on the corner without providing the additional 14 spaces. This project if approved would serve two positive functions. Filling in the breezeway will fill a gap and make for a more continuous retail environment. Adding Starbucks to the corner will provide an oasis for shoppers strolling the street. The El Paseo Business Association has reviewed the request and supports it (see memo attached). Given the time of year staff was not able to conduct a meaningful parking survey of the parking lot or nearby area so we are unable to provide quantifiable data. We would note that the addition is an infill situation in a nearly built-out retail environment. The new retail shop probably will not generate additional new traffic on its own but rather feed off of existing retail traffic. As for Starbucks, its peak hours are generally in the early morning and the evening (see letter from Starbucks). In the early morning and evenings most nearby businesses 6 , STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 are not open (except restaurants in the evening). Starbucks customers during these hours should not create a parking problem. During regular retail business hours it is felt that Starbucks will not be a destination unto itself. Customers of Starbucks during the day will likely already be parked elsewhere in the central El Paseo area. Lastly, we would note again that the Gardens parking structure provided more than 200 extra parking spaces for these types of situations. As was stated in the July 17, 2001 staff report on the El Paseo Square project located immediately to the west of this site. "As previously stated, the Palm Desert Commercial Core Area Specific Plan encourages solving parking issues in a positive manner rather than through restrictions on the level of economic activity. The overall goal of the Specific Plan is to promote quality economic development that is compatible with the City design standards. In 1996, the City Council invested in the construction of the Garden's on El Paseo's parking structure. The investment was intended to provide not only sufficient parking for the Gardens project, but to provide additional parking spaces to promote future economic development and revitalization along El Paseo. The parking structure was built with over 200 extra parking spaces. The Gardens on El Paseo is a principal destination along the El Paseo business district. The Gardens is used to access all of El Paseo's retail and restaurant experience. When the Gardens on El Paseo was built, its goal was to provide an anchor for the El Paseo district and to promote pedestrian access from the Gardens to the rest of El Paseo. The parking structure at the Gardens on El Paseo was built as a centralized parking facility to both the Garden's parking demand and for other customers wishing to access the rest of El Paseo." 7 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 OCTOBER 25, 2001 7. CONCLUSION: The issues raised in the appeal were considered by Planning Commission. The Planning Commission approved the request on a 5-0 vote, subject to conditions. The El Paseo Business Association has endorsed the project. The property manager at the Gardens has recommended that it be approved. The City paid to create 200 additional parking spaces in the Gardens parking structure. These are available parking spaces in the Gardens parking structure. Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved: &,-4:641%7, ST VE SMITH P ILIP DRELL PLANNING MANAGER DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT Review and Concur: Review and Concur: / RIC ARD J. LKERS CARLOS L. ORTEGA ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER OF CITY MANAGER DEVELOPMENT SERVICES CITY COUNCIL ACTION: *1) Waived further reading adopted APPROVED DENIED Resolution No. 01-112, denying the RECEIVED OTHER appeal and affirming the Planning Commission action for Case No. CUP MEETING, DATE - 01-15, with additional condition AYES: I J .P f �tLG�,o „ f Q1 ,u.Ax.) that the 25 employees of the complex ROES: / 1 v be required to park in the structur-: ABSENT: 74„pn-7 D ) at The Gardens; 2) By Minute Motion, ABSTAIN: AA 444 0 directed City staff to have a park- VERIFIED BY: l� g �u D) ing study conducted for El Paseo Original on File with City Clerk:9s Office 8 RESOLUTION NO. 01-112 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, DENYING AN APPEAL AND AFFIRMING THE ACTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A 1 ,262 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION THROUGH THE ENCLOSURE OF THE BREEZEWAY, APPROVAL TO PERMIT CONVERSION OF A 1 ,491 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL SPACE TO A STARBUCKS COFFEE SHOP AND A PARKING ADJUSTMENT TO FACILITATE THE TWO REQUESTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EL PASEO AND SAN PABLO, 73-520 EL PASEO. CASE NO. CUP 01-15 WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 25th day of October, 2001 , hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider an appeal to a decision of the Planning Commission approving a request by John Wessman dba Wessman Development Company on behalf of Robert Wolff for a conditional use permit for the addition of 1 ,262 square feet through enclosure of the existing breezeway, approval to permit a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop on the corner and a parking adjustment to facilitate the above two requests; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, by its Resolution No. 2094 has approved the requested conditional use permit and parking adjustment; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 00-24," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said City Council did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify denial of the approval and affirmation of the Planning Commission approval of said conditional use permit: 1 . The proposed building expansion and conversion of retail space to a coffee shop with outdoor seating is within the general parameters of the original approval and will not adversely impact parking availability for adjacent businesses. 2. The promotion and encouragement of successful restaurants on El Paseo is consistent with the goals of the Commercial Core Area Specific Plan and General Plan. RESOLUTION NO. 01-112 3. The project is supported by the El Paseo Business Association and the Property Manager at the Gardens. 4. There are available parking spaces in the Gardens parking structure across El Paseo from this center. The available parking spaces are a portion of the 200 extra parking spaces which the City paid to create at the Gardens. 5. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the City Council in this case. 2. That the appeal by Roemer, Harnik and Nethery LLP on behalf of Eltinge & Graziadio Development Co. is hereby denied. 3. That the action of the Planning Commission approving CUP 01 -15 is hereby affirmed. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert City Council, held on this day of , 2001 , by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN: JIM FERGUSON, Mayor ATTEST: SHEILA R. GILLIGAN, City Clerk City of Palm Desert, California 2 - CITY OF PALM DESERT DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT STAFF REPORT TO: Planning Commission DATE: September 18, 2001 CASE NO: CUP 01 -15 REQUEST: Approval of a conditional use permit to add 1 ,262 square feet through the enclosure of the existing breezeway, approval to permit a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop on the corner and a parking adjustment to facilitate the two requests. The property is located at the northeast corner of El Paseo and San Pablo, 73-520 El Paseo. APPLICANT: John Wessman Wessman Development Company 1 555 South Palm Canyon Drive, Suite G-106 Palm Springs, CA 92264 BACKGROUND: Rancho San Pablo was constructed in late 1978, early 1979. The project included a total of 18,528 square feet on two floors. The buildings front on El Paseo, San Pablo and Highway 111 and were to be used for retail and office purposes. This project provided 77 onsite parking spaces. A restaurant was originally approved in November 1 980 with 4,853 square feet of interior area and a 826 square foot outdoor dining patio. It was also limited to dinner only. The approval authorized the removal of three parking spaces. The outdoor dining area was never utilized nor were the parking spaces removed. In November 1982 the operator at that time (Palm Tree Restaurant) requested permission to serve lunch. The commission granted approval for a two-year trial period. No parking problems were noted during the period although the restaurant never had a successful lunch business. In May of 1988 the restaurant was taken over by Dominick Mancuso who also made an unsuccessful attempt at lunch operation. August 7, 1990 the Planning Commission approved the enclosure of the outdoor patio thereby adding 845 square feet for a total of 5,700 square feet of restaurant area. The restaurant Cup allows it to be open for lunch and dinner. STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 The approval was at least partially based on the fact that the Ahmanson (Gardens) development agreement required a "parking lot which will contain 200 spaces in excess of their base parking requirement. This supply should provide adequate overflow parking for the entire central El Paseo area." The approval conditioned the restaurant to "institute a mandatory employee parking program utilizing the Ahmanson parking." Essentially then we have a 18,528 square foot commercial center with a 5,700 square foot restaurant, retail, offices and a dental office. II. CURRENT REQUEST AND PARKING CALCULATION: The applicant seeks two approvals through this application. First, the applicant requests approval to enclose the existing breezeway and use it for general retail use. This would add 1 ,262 square feet to the center. Second, the applicant seeks approval of a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop in the corner unit where Trio currently exists. The plan provides seating for 20 on an outdoor patio and 21 inside. Through this CUP request, the applicant also requests a parking adjustment to permit the above two items without providing additional parking. A. PARKING: The proposed 1 ,262 square foot addition for retail purposes has a code requirement of five spaces (i.e., 4/1 ,000 square feet). The conversion of 1 ,491 square feet at the corner from retail to restaurant use creates an additional parking requirement of nine spaces (i.e., restaurant @ 10 spaces per 1 ,000 square feet = 15 spaces less six spaces already provided at retail standard 4/1 ,000). As proposed, this request results in a code required addition of 14 parking spaces (five-retail + nine-Starbucks). 2 111 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 III. ANALYSIS: The building addition will take place within the existing building envelope. The corner unit will be renovated but not expanded other than the outdoor seating area. There are no issues with respect to setbacks, height or coverage. The issue with this request is parking. Given the previous approvals, the mix of uses in the center and in the nearby area, is there enough parking available to allow the expansion and the new restaurant on the corner without providing the additional 14 spaces. This project if approved would serve two positive functions. Filling in the breezeway will fill a gap and make for a more continuous retail environment. Adding Starbucks to the corner will provide an oasis for shoppers strolling the street. The El Paseo Business Association has reviewed the request and supports it (see memo attached). Given the time of year staff was not able to conduct a meaningful parking survey of the parking lot or nearby area so we are unable to provide quantifiable data. We would note that the addition is an infill situation in a nearly built-out retail environment. The new retail shop probably will not generate additional new traffic on its own but rather feed off of existing retail traffic. As for Starbucks, its peak hours are generally in the early morning and the evening (see letter from Starbucks). In the early morning and evenings most nearby businesses are not open (except restaurants in the evening). Starbucks customers during these hours should not create a parking problem. During regular retail business hours it is felt that Starbucks will not be a destination unto itself. Customers of Starbucks during the day will likely already be parked elsewhere in the central El Paseo area. Lastly, we would note again that the Gardens parking structure provided more than 200 extra parking spaces for these types of situations. As was stated in the July 17, 2001 staff report on the El Paseo Square project located immediately to the west of this site. "As previously stated, the Palm Desert Commercial Core Area Specific Plan encourages solving parking issues in a positive manner rather than through restrictions on the level of economic activity. The overall goal 3 V " STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 of the Specific Plan is to promote quality economic development that is compatible with the City design standards. In 1996, the City Council invested in the construction of the Garden's on El Paseo's parking structure. The investment was intended to provide not only sufficient parking for the Gardens project, but to provide additional parking spaces to promote future economic development and revitalization along El Paseo. The parking structure was built with over 200 extra parking spaces. The Gardens on El Paseo is a principal destination along the El Paseo business district. The Gardens is used to access all of El Paseo's retail and restaurant experience. When the Gardens on El Paseo was built, its goal was to provide an anchor for the El Paseo district and to promote pedestrian access from the Gardens to the rest of El Paseo. The parking structure at the Gardens on El Paseo was built as a centralized parking facility to both the Garden's parking demand and for other customers wishing to access the rest of El Paseo." VI. CONCERNS: We have received a call from the property manager of the center to the east who expressed concern that the lack of parking at the Starbucks location will further impact parking at her center. Ms. Herrera noted that at lunch time Doug Arango's patrons spill over into her center, specifically the parking behind Beer Hunter. V. CONCLUSION: Through the combination of existing on-site and off-site parking, the project can comply with the city parking requirements. This type of solution meets the overall intent of the Palm Desert Commercial Core Area Specific Plan. This project will improve the pedestrian environment on El Paseo. The 14-space parking deficiency can be addressed in a positive manner through the use of excess spaces built at the Gardens parking structure. This solution is consistent with the goals and policies of the Core Area Specific Plan. Architectural Review Commission has granted preliminary approval to the architectural modifications. 4 7 STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 The El Paseo Business Association has endorsed the project. Staff will recommend approval of the application. A. FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT: 1 . That the proposed location of the conditional use is in accord with the objectives of this title and the purpose of the district in which the site is located. Response The property is zoned general commercial (C-1 ). Retail and restaurant uses are permitted in the C-1 zone. 2. That the proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, or welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. Response The proposed project will complement other nearby commercial uses and will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. 3. That the proposed conditional use will comply with each of the . applicable provisions of this title, except for approved variances or adjustments. Response The project complies with all code provisions except for parking. There is available parking in the Gardens parking structure across the street ' from this project. The City contributed funding to the Gardens parking structure to create excess parking. A parking adjustment is therefore warranted. • 4. That the proposed conditional use complies with the goals, objectives, and policies of the city's General plan. 5 ion IPry gr. STAFF REPORT CASE NO. CUP 01-15 SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 Response As is discussed at length in the report, the project complies with and will implement the Core Area Specific Plan and the General Plan. B. CEQA REVIEW: The project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for the purposes of CEQA and no further documentation is necessary. VI. RECOMMENDATION: That Case No. CUP 01-15 be approved subject to conditions. VII. ATTACHMENTS: A. Draft resolution B. Legal notice C. Comments from city departments and other agencies D. Plans'and exhibits Prepared by: Reviewed and Approved by: • Steve Smith Phil Drell Planning Manager Director of Community Development /tm • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2094 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW A 1 ,262 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION THROUGH THE ENCLOSURE OF THE BREEZEWAY, APPROVAL TO PERMIT CONVERSION OF A 1 ,491 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL SPACE TO A STARBUCKS COFFEE SHOP AND A PARKING ADJUSTMENT TO FACILITATE THE TWO REQUESTS. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF EL PASEO AND SAN PABLO, 73-520 EL PASEO. CASE NO. CUP 01-15 WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, did on the 18th day of September, 2001 , hold a duly noticed public hearing to consider the request of WESSMAN DEVELOPMENT COMPANY for approval of the project as described above; and WHEREAS, said application has complied with the requirements of the "City of Palm Desert Procedure for Implementation of the California Environmental Quality Act, Resolution No. 00-24," in that the Director of Community Development has determined that the project is a Class 3 categorical exemption for purposes of CEQA; and WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all interested persons desiring to be heard, said Planning Commission did find the following facts and reasons to exist to justify the granting of said conditional use permit: 1 . The proposed building expansion and conversion of retail space to a coffee shop with outdoor seating is within the general parameters of the original approval and will not adversely impact parking availability for adjacent businesses. 2. The promotion and encouragement of successful restaurants on El Paseo is consistent with the goals of the Commercial Core Area Specific Plan and General Plan. 3. The proposed location of the conditional use and the conditions under which it will be operated and maintained will not be detrimental to the public health, safety or general welfare, or be materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity. PLANNING COMMISSION-RESOLUTION NO. 2094 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Palm Desert, California, as follows: 1 . That the above recitations are true and correct and constitute the findings of the commission in this case. 2. That approval of Conditional Use Permit 01-15 is hereby approved, subject to the attached conditions. PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED at a regular meeting of the Palm Desert Planning Commission, held on this 18th day of September, 2001 , by the fallowing vote, to wit: AYES: CAMPBELL, FINERTY, JONATHAN, TSCHOPP, LOPEZ NOES: NONE ABSENT: NONE ABSTAIN: NONE • J PEZ, h erson ATTEST: PH I LIP DRELL, d ecretary Palm Desert Planning Commission 2 • PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2094 CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL CASE NO. CUP 01-15 Department of Community Development: 1 . Applicant shall comply with all state, county, and city regulations concerning restaurant use. 2. The applicant shall obtain all necessary Architectural Review Commission and Department of Building and Safety permits required by any physical modification of the site. 3. That the applicant shall include terms in the leases of the two business locations subject to this application requiring employees to park in the Gardens parking structure. Additionally, the applicant shall provide the City with a parking management plan for review and approval by the Director of Community Development to assure ongoing effective parking utilization. 4. That in the future should the use of the Starbucks coffee shop be changed to any other type of restaurant use it shall first obtain approval of an amendment to his CUP which shall specifically address the adequacy of on-site parking. This condition shall not be construed as to limit the City's ability to review this CUP for any other legitimate purpose. Department of Public Works: 1 . Signalization fees, in accordance with City of Palm Desert Resolution Nos. 79-17 and 79-55, shall be paid prior to issuance of a grading permit. 2. The project shall be subject to Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fees (TUMF). Payment of said fees shall be at time of building permit issuance. 3 ! °' SUBJECT TC yr RFT-iV REVISION MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 G. Case No. CUP 01-15 - JOHN WESSMAN, Applicant Request for approval of a conditional use permit to add 1 ,262 square feet through the enclosure of the existing breezeway, approval to permit a 1 ,491 square foot Starbucks coffee shop on the corner and a parking adjustment to facilitate the two requests. The property is located at the northeast corner of El Paseo and San Pablo, 73-520 El Paseo. Mr. Smith explained that the request was two fold in nature. The first part was to enclose the existing breezeway and develop it out with 1 ,262 square feet of retail space. The second part of the request was to convert the existing retail space on the corner at San Pablo and El Paseo, the northeast corner, some 1 ,491 square feet, to a Starbucks coffee shop and to approve a parking adjustment to facilitate the two requests. The center was originally constructed in the late 70's with a total of 18,528 square feet, a mix of one and two story development. He said the portion on El Paseo is single story. At that point in time the project was used for retail and office purposes and provided 77 parking spaces. There was a restaurant approved in the early 80's which is now Doug Arrango's. Through various approvals through the Planning Commission through the late 80's and early 90's, that restaurant grew in size to around 5,700 square feet. The CUP for the restaurant allowed it to be open for lunch and dinner. In reviewing the approval on that restaurant from 1990, part of staff's argument at that time was that the parking lot that was being required of Ahmanson at that point was going to contain 200 additional spaces in excess of their base parking requirement and concluded that this supply should provide adequate overflow parking for the entire central El Paseo area. At that point the approval conditioned the restaurant to institute a mandatory employee parking program utilizing the Ahmanson parking. At that point it was just a dirt lot across the street and was later developed into the existing parking structure. With respect to the parking, the proposed 1 ,262 square foot addition would create a need for five additional spaces per code. Conversion of the 1 ,491 square feet on the corner from retail to restaurant use would create an additional need for nine spaces for a total of 15 spaces less the six they already were assumed to provide, so the five and nine create a need for 14 parking spaces. Staff felt approval of the project to enclose the breezeway would serve a positive function. It would fill a gap in the 21 �F SUBJECT `< b n ‘ t-iFT + Wit" MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 retail environment, provide for a more continuous retail environment, and adding Starbucks would provide an oasis for shoppers strolling on the street. The matter had been reviewed by the El Paseo Business Association and there was a letter from Ruth Ann Moore of staff who attended that meeting which indicates that they supported it. The City also received a letter from the General Manager of the Gardens which supports the application. Staff also received a letter from the Property Manager of the center immediately to the east which objected to the request and indicated that Doug Arrango's currently through the lunch hour encroaches into their parking area and the conclusion is that Starbucks would exacerbate that problem further. Mr. Smith informed commission that staff was unable to conduct a meaningful parking survey given that it is summer. Staff felt it is an inf ill situation, would not generate bunches of new traffic, and they also received a letter from Starbucks which indicates that 60% of their sales take place before 10:00 a.m. The area was not very busy before 10:00 a.m. Mr. Smith said that for the same reasons that staff argued for the project to the west, the parking structure across the street was constructed with excess spaces. This was close enough to it that their staff could be expected to use it. In conclusion, staff recommended approval of both requests. He indicated that Architectural Review Commission granted preliminary approval of the architectural modifications which were necessary. Findings for approval of the conditional use permit were outlined in the staff report and is a Class 3 categorical exemption for CEQA purposes. No further documentation is necessary. Mr. Smith recommended approval, subject to conditions. Mr. Drell stated that it was kind of ironic that the project Ms. Herrera manages was, developed with a significant parking adjustment because of the same rationale. When looking at El Paseo, the overall health of the street was considered and at that time it was the back end of Jensen's. Staff argued that it was far more desirable and beneficial for the street to allow that property owner, who Ms. Herrera works for, to build out retail without significant parking because it was far better for everyone on the street than to have the back end of a shopping center. Again, staff used the same rationale and was why $2 million was spent building 200 extra spaces. While parking is a concern, there were greater concerns when looking at the overall management and operation of a shopping district. 22 !"" SUBJECT TC " REVISION MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 Referring to Ms. Herrera's map, Commissioner Campbell asked if the parking spaces on Larkspur behind her buildings were Ms. Herrera's or Jensen's. Mr. Drell said that originally her buildings were built on what was a parking lot for Jensen's and this was the same owner as Jensen's and was all part of the property she manages. Her tenants could use any of the parking at Jensen's. That was also part of the justification because rarely is the Jensen's parking lot full. Commissioner Campbell pointed out that she never saw anyone parked over by Larkspur. Mr. Drell said there were two people parked there today, but apparently even her employees don't park there although the spaces would be quite convenient. He wasn't sure where her employees park. Commissioner Jonathan said that what Mr. Drell was saying was that when the commission grants parking adjustments, that particular applicant is on their doorstep complaining about the next business that gets one, so they could expect that from this applicant in the near future. Mr. Drell hoped that wouldn't happen. Commissioner Jonathan noted that Mr. Drell made the point, and Commissioner Jonathan concurred, that the 200 excess spaces at the Gardens was available to assist with parking situations and other developing properties and they have heard that a few times. He noted that it wasn't an inexhaustible solution because there was a fixed number of spaces and asked if Mr. Drell was tabulating how many spaces have been accounted for. Mr. Drell said they have approved very little. There was Ms. Herrera's project, which was 20-30 spaces short, and Doug Arrango's was probably another 20 because of the requirement for their employees to park there. Commissioner Campbell noted there was also San Pablo Square and Commissioner Jonathan said OfficeMax. Mr. Drell noted that one wasn't approved yet. Commissioner Jonathan said there was an argument for use of the excess spaces. Mr. Drell said that part of that argument was based on the fact that there wouldn't be people parking there not necessarily because their destination was simply that store. The argument for the El Paseo Square project was that a percentage of their customers were going to be pedestrians who actually came to El Paseo to park at the Gardens. Our whole goal in subsidizing the Gardens and promoting the Gardens was that people who go to the Gardens and park at the Gardens walk and leave the Gardens and cross the street and walk down the street. That was the whole philosophy in the Core Commercial Plan in promoting the Gardens and why the City spent $5 million to make sure it happened. These were actually Gardens customers who continue to walk down the 23 1,-. .-ThAFT- REV SUBJECTISION\T(\ MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 street. There were probably under 80 of the 200 and by the nature of the high end shops at the Gardens, they generate relatively low volumes but hopefully high customer sales. They probably had on average 300-400 extra spaces. Commissioner Campbell noted that when she was President of the El Paseo Business Association, when the Gardens opened, Ms. Herrera's tenants along there were calling her saying that the employees from the Gardens were parking right in front of her stores. They had all the parking in the back, but the employees were parking right in front of her stores all day long. She hoped that had been resolved. Mr. Drell said that with the exception of one employee who refuses to be polite, it had been addressed. Commissioner Campbell stated that she hoped all of these employees would park at the Gardens and that it would be mandatory as one of the conditions. Mr. Drell concurred and stated that with all subsequent leases at this center, they would always have that condition. Doug Arrango's already has that condition and staff would make sure that that condition is being enforced. That would probably be the greatest conflict with Ms. Herrera's project, the cooks and employees that show up in that 2:00 p.m. time period which is in conflict with her businesses, to make sure those employees do park at the Gardens. Commissioner Campbell asked if the applicant had been working with Doug Arrango's regarding the access and if it had been resolved. Right now patrons park in the rear and use the breezeway which would now be enclosed. She asked if any arrangements had been made with Doug Arrango's on how their people would get to the front door. Mr. Drell said he assumed they would walk around the building. He noted that it is a fairly short block. They have other retail developers who actually prefer that and want to force customers to walk in front of as many stores in their center as possible and not allow people to go in and out directly from a parking lot, especially with a restaurant. Commissioner Campbell noted that was easy to say, but the customers have been doing it this way for years. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the zoning for the expanded space would be for restaurant use. Mr. Smith said no, the expanded space would be retail and the conversion space on the corner would be from retail to restaurant. Commissioner Tschopp asked if the restaurant space would allow any restaurant to go in. Mr. Smith said no, condition number four required that if it changes from Starbucks, it had to come back through the Planning Commission. 24 AF- z SUBJECT TC •• REVISION MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 Chairperson Lopez opened the public hearing and asked the applicant to address the commission. MR. JOHN WESSMAN, 72-200 Clancy Lane in Rancho Mirage, stated that this was a little unusual for him in that it was one of the few buildings he had ever gone out and bought from someone else. Usually they try to develop their own buildings and it wasn't exactly the kind of building he would have developed himself, but they were working on it. As part of this development, he was doing a couple of Starbucks in the Palm Springs and Cathedral City areas and he, Sam Spinello and Cindy Freo's from Starbucks were talking about the Desert Fashion Plaza in Palm Springs and he asked her how come Starbucks wasn't on El Paseo. She said that they have two stores in Palm Desert, one at Town Center Drive at the Best Buy shopping center and one at the other end of Palm Desert. Mr. Wessman said he agreed, but pointed out that they didn't have a store like they did in every other city for pedestrians. She said they looked at El Paseo and the Gardens, but there wasn't any space available right on the street, so they weren't interested and thought perhaps the street was maybe too seasonal. They got her to come down two or three months ago, she looked at the site and said that if they were going to locate on El Paseo, this location would be the only one. Once she was interested, they sat down with their tenant who has six years left on his lease (Trios on the corner) and they didn't want to leave the center and didn't want them to buy them out, so they started to look at alternatives and the only alternative was to use the breezeway and fill it in and once they were going to do that, they would improve the looks of the building by getting rid of some of the ugly 8 x 12's hanging off the building and replaster the fascia like Doug Arrango's did in 1 995 or 96 when they took over that space. They thought maybe they could improve the look of the building and still keep their tenant and move them over and that was why they put the two projects together. Without one, the other didn't work. That was how they arrived at the current proposal and a 14 space deficiency in the parking spaces. He said they talked to all of the tenants and it would be a little more difficult to get into Doug Arrango's if they had to walk, but not really that much more because it was only 100 feet. They were also willing to work with Doug Arrango's. If they wanted to, they 25 rak _,.� SUBJECT 'K. - REVISION MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 would come up with a secondary entrance off the back which they would have on this new shop and which Trios really liked because their tenants could park in the parking lot and come into their new space where the current breezeway is. All in all it looked like a good addition to that corner and he thought what they were doing would improve the look of the building considerably and Starbucks themselves spend $250,000 to $300,000 on their spaces and would upgrade the corner area there and they would remove one of the barricades sitting there right now which was a little block wall that sits up about five feet so they would have a clearer view of the corner. He thought it was important to keep the corner set back and they weren't doing anything to the basic structure of the building other than the fact that they would be putting new awnings on it. Awnings that fit the Starbucks image versus that round awning. He thought the Architectural Review Board thought they were improving the look of the building considerably. One of the things they were doing with Starbucks and the other tenants there was they were going to enforce the rules to have the employees park in the structure behind the center. They also met with Ruth Ann Moore and the downtown Merchant's Association • and they were totally behind it. They met with the Manager of the Gardens and they were totally behind it and thought it would be a wonderful addition to that portion of the street. Commissioner Jonathan said that one of the critical ways they could justify the parking adjustment is one of the conditions requiring that employees park in the Gardens structure. Mr. Wessman said they wanted that for their benefit, too. Commissioner Jonathan said that it made sense to him to take it a half step further and require that all employees receive written notification. Mr. Wessman said he didn't have a problem with that either. Commissioner Jonathan said he would be suggesting that as a condition and the reason for that was because there was often a loss in the translation between what occurs here and reality in the immediate future and certainly in five or ten years. He said he appreciated Mr. Wessman's cooperation. 26 V.Z6 SUBJECT TC - RE11tSI014 MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 Mr. Wessman stated that one of the things that Starbucks said was when they finally made the decision to go on El Paseo was they felt from a pedestrian traffic position, this was the only spot they really wanted to go because they figured they could capture a lot of the people that were already there. They thought they would pick up 10% or 20% of their customers by car and that 70% to 80% would be existing tenants on the street that come in early to open their stores and then customers that are already on the street and he believed they were right. Chairperson Lopez asked if anyone wished to speak in FAVOR or OPPOSITION to the proposal. There was no one and the public hearing was closed. Chairperson Lopez asked for commission comments or action. Commissioner Campbell said that she has been in business on El Paseo for the last 15 years and was familiar with the building. When she goes by there, there has always been ample parking in that parking lot. She knew that with the Starbucks coming in there would be more employees, but she thought the 14 parking spaces wouldn't be a problems She just wanted to make sure that the Doug Arrango's restaurant was comfortable. If he was going to have a second access from the parking lot and he really only had that one door, the patio entrance, he could probably use that if he needed to. She was in favor of the project. Commissioner Jonathan said that as the staff report identified, parking was probably the issue and he would be a lot happier if there were 14 extra spaces rather than 14 short, but that wasn't reality and they didn't see that situation too often. The ordinance was there as a gauge and staff indicated they were 14 spaces short compared to the ordinance, but he noted there have been times when the Council has required projects to have more parking than the ordinance because of special circumstances. Most Starbucks locations would require more parking spaces than the ordinance and there were whole comedy routines about the long lines at Starbucks and those people got there normally by driving and parking their cars and he has been to Starbucks locations where that has been a problem. But he thought Mr. Wessman was right when he said that many people would be walking to this location. If someone wanted to drive to a Starbucks in Palm Desert, there were two on Highway 1 1 1 that were more accessible and hoped it worked out that 27 . F� SUBJECT TC A- FT-- REVISION MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 way. Coupled with the fact that they do have the Gardens structure and this was where the intended use of the spaces could come in very effectively. He thought they had a situation that perhaps could justify the parking adjustment. In order to facilitate that their intent gets to the rank and file, he suggested that condition number three be modified to add a requirement that employees be notified in writing of the mandate to park in the structure. Mr. Drell said that they could make it a little stronger and require that the applicant submit to staff a plan for ongoing enforcement and effective enforcement of that requirement. Commissioner Jonathan concurred. Commissioner Campbell also concurred and agreed that adding that condition made sense and that Starbucks would be a great asset in this location. Commissioner Tschopp thought it would be a great addition to El Paseo and would add to the continuity of the whole street. It would help generate some foot traffic. It would complement the existing businesses. Consistent with his previous comments on other applicants before the commission, he thought the parking structure was built because of the parking problems on El Paseo with the express intent to try and address some of those problems and helping the entire street. He thought this was a perfect example of how those types of moves by the City could economically help an area like this. He was very much in favor of the proposed project. Chairperson Lopez stated that he also concurred. Initially he was very concerned about what would be a very crowded parking lot relatively early in the morning. He visited the area and talked with a doctor's office and they made the comment that parking was really a problem behind that building until the Gardens opened up and then they wondered where everyone was going and figured out they were parking at the Gardens. There is a problem at lunch time with Doug Arrango's, but he hoped by lunch time the auto traffic to Starbucks would be gone. He felt Starbucks would be a great addition to El Paseo and the foot traffic would really provide a lot of business, so he would also concur. He thought the improvement to the building would be tremendous and really needed to have some improvement. He asked for a motion. 28 f SUP LLii1RL MINUTES PALM DESERT PLANNING COMMISSION SEPTEMBER 18, 2001 Commissioner Campbell said she would move for approval with the amendment to condition number three for the ongoing enforcement for the employee parking and with the written notification to the employees and the submittal of the program to the city. Action: It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting the findings as presented by staff. Motion carried 5-0. It was moved by Commissioner Campbell, seconded by Commissioner Finerty, adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2094, approving CUP 01-15, subject to conditions as amended. Motion carried 5-0. IX. MISCELLANEOUS A. Discussion of proposed Desert Gateway project at the southeast corner of Monterey and Dinah Shore. Mr. Drell explained that this was an informational discussion of a proposal for which staff did not have an application. The only perspective he could give on staff's position and the position of the Retail Committee, which is a committee comprised of two council members, the City Manager and himself, is that the City's overall goal with this project is that this is probably one of the primary gateways to the city and they wanted to make sure that if they do a center right, this is the one they would do right and it wouldn't look like other projects they have seen before in the valley. MR. BILL CARVER addressed the commission. He explained that also present was Maggie Montez, who would be doing their leasing. He said they have a project that is in motion. It is one they wanted feedback from the commission on and he said he wanted to listen more than talk. He said he wanted to give them an overall view of where they are, what they would like to plan to do and a bit of the history of the property. He said he talked with a couple of the commissioners and would be repeating some of those points. When this property was annexed into Palm Desert in 1992, they had just finished a big battle with the interchange at Dinah Shore in connection with the Price Club and the settlement 29 ELTINGE GRAZIADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE:,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 Via Facsimile and Federal Express (310)533-1068 • FAx(310)533-1375 September 17, 2001 Mr. Philip Drell and City Council Members RECEIVED City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive SEP 1 8 2001 Palm Desert, CA 92260 COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Attention: City Council Members and Palm Desert Planning Commission CITY OF PALM DESERT re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear Mr. Philip Drell and Council Members: We've just received the notice several days ago concerning a CUP request to allow a 1491 s.f. Starbucks Coffee Shop and to make a parking adjustment because of inadequate parking of 9 spaces. I called Steve Smith, Planning Department, last week and expressed our"opposition"to the request of John Wessman, dba Wessman Development Company. Our property is located at 73-540 El Paseo immediately East of the proposed Starbucks at San Pablo and El Paseo. We already have serious problems with parking. I've enclosed a site plan of our property for your review. Currently we lose our parking to Doug Arango's Restaurant located at 73-520 El Paseo from 11:00 am to 2:00 pm for their lunch time. We've installed "No restaurant parking" and talked to Doug Arango's owners to no avail. They respond that if we tow one of their customer vehicles they will have the person purchase something from one of our businesses and sue us for towing. Their lunch time traffic continue to use our parking and we are reviewing our options. • To allow Starbucks to operate right next door to Doug Arango's in the same exact center,when there is already a parking problem will greatly interfere and affect our businesses even further. We protest the Starbucks use coming into that center and stress that our own businesses cannot afford to lose any more parking. We still have problems from the Gardens using our parking lot and walking across the street to shop at the Gardens and not our property. We should not be put in this position, of continually monitoring and towing cars just so our own businesses can operate. Thank you for allowing us to express our concerns. Sincerely, Eltinge &Graziadio Development Company Carol Herrera, Property Manager Sep 17 01 12: 52p E G DEV CO 3105331375 p. 3 "1\ 44,—‘..S EriS7i1w, 1L 7 Sit 46‘ .a �` ..L.__ 1 1 I 1 . 1 ....____. 7 _ . . ,.. f.( --sss-s....---c\- '-s\.\ v • - C1 d ° � \..) .4. A C. 1 f " C r MO 2 P , 1/:1: 1 r; H U 6 A 01 0 l w 0 . 4 hlO+ G \... a s. .., _, ti N_ Treie.NZT YAW / a n1--NN,,t . r *.. F T ' W IN ' 16 I N 14\-•.: . I i i 1 . --..• L 07AitS/VA., L ANC Received Sep-17-2001 12:53pm From-3105331375 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 003 GART NS O 1! ! l • A ! F O PALM D E S E R T , CALIFORNIA September 18,2001 Phil Drell City of Palm Desert 73510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert,CA 92260 Re: Starbucks at San Pablo and El Paseo Dear Phil: Please communicate this letter of support to the Palm Desert Planning Commission. As an El Paseo Association Board Member,I have reviewed the plans and objectives of Wessman Development for the NE corner of San Pablo and El Paseo with approval. As a fellow Landlord representative and neighbor,I am in favor of this use. El Paseo continues working to create a sense of place where the ambiance for shopping and dining is relaxing and enjoyable. The proposed El Paseo Starbucks location is unmatched anywhere within the Coachella Valley. With the ample public parking structure,minimal traffic and incredible desert vistas fronting a cove of residential dwellers,this store will expand the Districts service to our current customer base and familiarize others to the allure and charm of El Paseo. The Gardens on El Paseo,under the parking management agreement with the City of Palm Desert,has successfully managed parking for the Districts employees/patrons and we welcome the additional parking traffic Starbucks will bring. We at Madison Marquette have always believed that a Starbucks would be a compliment and an amenity to the El Paseo shopping experience. Regards, 41W (fel eV4C Tammy Perez "Ica General Manager Cc: Ann Neidlinger Madison Marquette,Western Region Vice-President RuthAnn Moore City of Palm Desert,Business Support Manager C:\FILES\CORRES\starbuckselpaseo.doc Sep 13 21 05: 18p M IN 2 CHLAVIN 325 5484 p. 1 Sep-13-2001 05:05pm From-PALM ",f PUBLIC WORKS DEPT 7603417090 T-989 P.001/001 F-742 00/13/01 11:37 FAX �._ ei 001 4-'6/ 140,r(r/b5L _ September 7,2001 Stuvu Smith.City Planner City ofPalm Desert 73510 Frud waring Drive Palm Dcscrt, CA 92260 RE: Proposed Starbucks Coffee El Par;eo tit San Pablo,Palm Desert, CA Dear Mr. Smith, As relates w your question regarding Sawbucks business in tho AM hours, on nverege Sterbu eks produces 60%of its business between the hours of 5:30 AM and 10:00 AM. Should you have any additional questions please don't hesitate to oontact me. Sincerely, • iady Fr Is Development Manager Racsived Sop-13-T001 1T:38pe From- fe-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 001 Received Sep-13-2001 05:12pm From-760 325 5484 To-PALM DESERT PUBLIC W Page 001 Sea-25-2001 10:34am From-PALM DESERT PUBLIC WORKS DEPT 760341709E T-III P 002/002 F-053 1f :_ . 4 jib t CITY OF PALM DESERT, CALIFO . . RECEIVE() -/� : i C t 0 2 20m s,It ' ' �''4'� APPLICATION TO APPEAL S. , 40* • DECISION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OL (Name of Committee/Commission) • Case No. CUP 01 -1 5 Mecting Date: Sept. 18, 2001 Name ofAppellant Eltinge & Graziadio Dev.Co. c/o Roemer, Harnik & Nethery, LLP, attorneys AAMVmm 45-025 Manitou Drive, Indian Wells, CA pbone: (60 ) 360-2400 Description of Application: CUP for Starbuck' s Restaurant with a 14 parking space adjustment. Property is located at the northeast corner of El Paseo and San Pablo. Reason for Appeal: Insufficient parking may substantially impact adjoining tenants . A parking problem already exists with Doug Arango Restaurant patrons using Appellant' s parking lot. The Planning Commission approved the space adjustment without having the benefit of a parking survey. Inadequate notice was given to Appellant because of an address change. Signature of Appellant Dated 0 /0 2/01 • FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY Date Appeal Filed: I o ���( Fee Received: rx, 2 �d� �� Treastue>�s Receipt #: Received by: • Public Hearing Set For: ` '5 T) Action taken by the City Council: Date: Sheila R. Gilligan, City Clerk • ROEMER, HARNIK & NETHERY LLP 3490 Ill PH.760-360-2400 45-025 MANROU DRIVE A:71"—A / 90-3824/1222 t INDIAN WELLS,CA 92210 DATE ( r I PAY ialMt 484Ld 1 ° THE m , p R OF n 6 l ` l� DOLLARS .E, . i d' c :a FIRST COMMUNITY BANK Indian Wells Office N-750Hi f g�WW111a•h6w Wah,CA 91210 (7e01 a7e-p87o C - 7V1 eli‘14 ® FOR 6-4-6 ValLe l • '003490u 1: L2 2 C g 4 . 1 24025 ©V PE &*gTR DATE (0'",�--C'( 73510 FRED WARING DR.•PALM DESERT,CA 92260 TREASURER'S RECEIP AMOUNT,` 5Q RECEIVED FRO s� _ �r��. _' • - '.610 - •ROJECT# FOR Leif . _M M M M N .i.. A gr v ACCOUNT DISTRIBUTION cc FUND DEPT DIV ELEM/OBJ AMOUNT OY RECEIVED FOR THE CITY TREASURER _____________________ ,a..4kio Mlo c314:0 FINANCE DEPARTMENT USE ONLY i�pe^F�:' �$ ec : � D�:P �� �'�3 Recpt no: 3218 --.- CHECK 450.00 --■- CHECKS ACCEPTED SUBJECT TO BANK CLEARANCE • • 4 • • • • • ROEMER, HARNIK& NETHER Y, LLP ATTORNEYS AT LAW 45-025 MANITOU DRIVE INDIAN WELLS,CALIFORNIA 92210 RICHARD I.ROEMER TELEPHONE(760)360-2400 BRIAN S.HARNIK FACSIMILE(760)360-1211 D.MARTIN NETHERY• HELENE P.DREYER 'PROFESSIONAL CORP. October 24, 2001 Mr. Philip Drell, VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY Director of Community Development CITY OF PALM DESERT 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 RE: CASE NO. CUP 01-15 STARBUCKS COFFEE CITY COUNCIL MEETING OF OCTOBER 25, 2001 Dear Mr. Drell: Numerous business owners are opposed to granting the parking adjustment for the proposed Starbuck's at the corner of El Paseo and San Pablo. Our client,Eltinge & Graziadio Development Company, has asked many such owners to submit written opposition. Such letters are enclosed. I request that a copy of this package of letters be distributed to each Council member for their consideration. Several of these letters are form letters on Eltinge&Graziadio letterhead sent in care of this office, but are signed by the business owner as indicated. Others are self explanatory. The business responses are from: 1. Jensen's Finest Foods; 2. Allstate Insurance Company; I. -< o 3. Upper Crust; --a rrnn rn (xi n rn 4. Pat's Lighting& Lamps; c„ < rn 5. Exxon-Mobil Oil; CD cn T, 6. Sally's Nails; m rn 7. Pampered Bath; Mr. Philip Drell October 24, 2001 Page 2- 8. Palm Desert Laundry; 9. Pastry Swan Bakery; 10. Master Pools and Spas; 11. Marinello's Restaurant; 12. El Tecolote; 13. Frasca Jewelers; 14. Palm Desert Camera and Unusual Gifts; 15. Lifestyle Nutrition; 16. Palm Desert Cleaners; 17. Palm Desert Tobacco; 18. Fireside Pharmacy; 19. JP Hug (Owner); and 20. Burke Tiller, Rick Teferteller(Owner). Thank you for your consideration. Yours very truly, ROEMER,HARNIK&NETHERY,LLP BRIAN S.HARNIK Enclosures: Noted above cc: City Council Members (with enclosures) VIA PERSONAL DELIVERY '#'M T�1�l & a f'ff/ A T --::t':`i..:•`:'r:',:-. ELTI V E GRAZI DIO EISDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 101 53 068 (3VCIObeT 1b,•2 (310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Hamik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-601 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens, there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our panting lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur'to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Jensen's Finest Foods Tony Paoletta CA Lic. ()A i!state. Exclusivea Agent 73-607 Highway 111 You're in good hands. Palm Desert, CA 92260 Bus: (760)773-0055 Fax: (760)340-6634 City of Palm Desert October 18, 2001 c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik &Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members Re: Case No. CUP 01-15 Northeast Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, California Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My office is located at 73-607 Highway 111, Palm Desert, California. I base my protest on the following: 1) My office is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas. 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbuck's employees are required to park at the Gardens, there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good; However, by allowing Starbuck's to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Tony Paoletta Tony Paoletta Insurance Agency Allstate Insurance Company, Exclusive Agent THE a 0 -' 1 , (9.0 . 9, °low r COMPANY ,z-vetiL444 tv-t Di- is , .,4 amt. Lii-rktety. e_45-7,4--“A"u i it-XE Crisviet_zecri-tuLee t44t-ilo-e_ tile 4._-__ dp ei_e-ty- w-r-t4,6--a_l i /1 i tf2 /detatAA.41 -�. & L ilLe adthit-Le . il F 0 I - j14 , q , - If ' 104; s: ex -th lot 0 , Lg c "rA''"1--".1°. / all 67)CA6tAil -t Ge6 4 ' 4 .L4: - ix -- 44,44, (-C-1 f -eLii ata \ r / 4 et t 1.'(. -! 2 OALiedtIL frL2 /� 5 AI /el i ' • fi-wty-tyci (1,t,utri,j it-LA 74.4-17L filt-tx-fj 0 I --y6-zab, -,r-C,(4. 73540 EL PASEO • PALM DESERT, CA 92260 • (619) 568-1998 MCA PALACE oft B LIGH11" („10V0 , ._ / IIDAT ., . .,. f" �� l 1 ['1+ i \Alinr.I;-Ili`, I ' [ i p LIGHTING & LAMPS .;`-r ,. 91l. xis . ,,,,r aiF �'y,,,,, 1 ,' a .. y 1 OCT i ri ?8tl i , :t,1 1 0 October 9, 2001 Mr. Philip Drell and City Council Members City of Palm Desert 73-510 Fred Waring Drive Palm Desert, CA 92260 Re: Case No: CUP 01-15 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear Mr. Philip Drell and Council Members: This is in regards to a Conditional Use Permit request to allow Starbucks Coffee Shop 1491 s.f spce and making an accommodation for inadequate parking space at 73-520 El Paseo. I fully support new businesses coming in the area and believe that will help the city and businesses, however by allowing Starbucks to move into a development that is known for its parking problems will increase the use of our parking lot at Jensens Shopping Center by the employees and customers of merchants on El Paseo. Hope you will review the Conditional Use Permit to Starbucks Coffee Shop and our concerns of providing adequate parking for our customers. Thanking you in anticipation. \, incerely, \ 7 Vib erma C.L.C. Pats Lighting and Lamps 73-605 HIGHWAY 111 • PALM DESERT,CA 92260 • (619)568.3502 :.:Y::;_•::.;`".:.`" ELTINGE GRAZIADJO ESDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 1 66$$ 2001 (310)53 -1ober 16 �S (310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Hamik Roemer, Hamik &Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-611 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites,with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Exxon-Mobil Oil Mike Maher ti. • . TM ELTINGE & GRAZIADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 �01 633 06a Eax1 13 VCiober 1 b,�2VU 1�310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-575 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites,with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, )-PAUCtikr . Sally's Nails EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 �p 533- p5g Fa�c 1319 0 -e11 1b,.2Vu1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-580 El Paseo#B1B, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's(73-520 El Paseo)customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Out parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo; We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Pampered Bath • • 72���TM �1 7/�1 (� /�'11 A I''� w A �t ':::•`:��'���. ELT I \ `AYE & `aJ,R 1ZI DIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 �0 533- o6a Fc (3 9Rager 16,�2UU 1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-587 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo)customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, 5.1.De).2x;) Palm Desert L ndry 7:4t. dik TPA 1.1 ELTINGE & GRAZIADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY PO.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 (319We1r0n:2F/6(010)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-560 El Paseo#C, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo)customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consid ration. Sincerely, (i(t) Pastry Swan Bakery • ELTINGE & G ALA, 1® E DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 i01 53� 068 Fc (3Vctober 16,.2UV1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik &Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-555 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. a ter ools and Spa 40,t, EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 gyp)533. pig (3VCtObCT16, 261(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer,Harnik &Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-609 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short"14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Marinello's Restaurant 677alle;. Oct; 2.3 01 03: 40p E G DEV CO 11 n5331375 p. 2 MAY 2R '9a 50PM AT&T F_ _ 71l5Pr — Oct 23 01 03126p 5 0 DEV GO at05331375 P•2 "'4 ELTINGE &GP AZIADiO DCYDLOPML`NT COMMIS" PSI kw Ve7.TOnoubbee.Cl1 OEM flu Ci'wsw►w Buo.,Sin i*Tou.aict.CA wsot City Or Palm Desert do Mr.Brian Harnik Roemer,Hamik&Ne thery 45-025 ManitOu Drivc Palm Desert, CA 92210 Ast.m Gay Cot> 11 M nbers re: Case No. CUP 01.15 North East Comer of EJ Paseo and Saa Pablo: 13-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Dean Councit latembersV This letter its written rn prollaa to Alcove(VP request ror Starbuck's Coffer.This will have a. direct impact on my buss . My store is located at 73-560 El Pasco NE, Palm Desert,CA. bass my protest on the fb1111'$: 1) My store is already affected-by Doug Arango s(73-520 El Pasco)customers and employees parking in our parking'lot and aluug El Pasco creating a shortage of• •- • our custamcn and-employeer•Tbereare'employees parking in our shopping center Of along El Plies/aord'Miring across to the Gardens taking parking away from our bus"•- • 2)• The manning Con ort Girs-sniff recommended approvatotncc tarparking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding men. 1) Time i.no madman in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Sawbucks cmployaas-ore•re u reh to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employes and eustonws of Starbuck's arc gouts to park in the moat convenient parking Our perking lot is the only viik parking lot from-Larkspur to San-Pablo.We fully support • businizses coming to the anti tend believe the efCPCasc of traffic for all the businmles will b0• • however,by allowing Star so- a into a-development knowing-tin,zre-short"14 . , spaces"is not fair to the Mat*businesses Other pi tcntial ciic .with Arlectuatr parking oh.• • be expiated. Thank you f. •ur cmnideaatisn S •glir • of . y' kgz4/ . • r.• Williams Err-..tote .• • - - - - - - - - - --- - ---- e - - ELTINGE & GRAZIADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 t01 533 06a Fc 13VCiober 1b,.2UU1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-560 El Paseo#B1A, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo)customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens, there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Frasca Jewelers • 40MIL TM & /l .::t''('•:•1:'�":� ELTINGE RAZI DIO ED' DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 �pl g pig g�, (30gyiei I b, 2�V 1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Hamik Roemer, Hamik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-571 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens, there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for aii the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Palm Desert Camera and Unusual Gifts :._[ .. \TM ELTI V ` E & R AZI ADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 1 F X (3Ocl33tober 16 06�, 2U1i1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-563 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, /ir i estyle Nutrition .7„ju,„ EL IN E & GRAZIAEG I1 10 DEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 io1 63� osa Fa�c (319eNger 1 :2UV 1�310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-583 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking iot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, , Palm Desert Cleae ELTINGE & GRAZIADIO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE, CA 90501 �p 5 (3M8a-eipigb,•2 1(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert do Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik &Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-580 El Paseo#D, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo) customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces" is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites,with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, Palm Desert Tobacco s M --- _Y._ .: ELTINGE 8 GRAZIADJO EGDEVELOPMENT COMPANY P.O.Box 2747,TORRANCE,CA 90501 2355 CRENSHAW BLVD.,SUITE 148,TORRANCE,CA 90501 g $ F (3Oc)tober l b, 2�S'�(310)533-1375 City Of Palm Desert c/o Mr. Brian Harnik Roemer, Harnik&Nethery 45-025 Manitou Drive Palm Desert, CA 92210 Attention: City Council Members re: Case No. CUP 01-15 North East Corner of El Paseo and San Pablo: 73-520 El Paseo Palm Desert, CA Dear City of Palm Desert Council Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbuck's Coffee. This will have a direct impact on my business. My store is located at 73-613 Highway 111, Palm Desert, CA. I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo)customers and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. There are employees parking in our shopping center or along El Paseo and walking across to the Gardens taking parking away from our business. 2) The Planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas; 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbuck's are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking lot is the only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo. We fully support new businesses coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good, however,by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short "14 parking spaces"is not fair to the existing businesses. Other potential sites, with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely,(7) —. - . .7-- Fireside Pharmacy • CITY OF PALM DESERT C/O MR.BRIAN HARNIK ROEMER,HARNIK & NETHERY 45-025 MANITOU DRIVE PALM DESERT,CA 92210 A 1ThNTION: CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS RE: CASE NO. CUP01-15 NORTH EAST CORNER of EL PASEO and SAN PABLO 73-520 EL PASEO PALM DESERT,CA 92260 Dear City of Palm Desert Members: This letter is written to protest the above CUP request for Starbucks Cafe. This will have a • Direct impact on my business.My store is located at 73-580 El Paseo , suite A I base my protest on the following: 1) My store is'already affected by Doug Arango's (73-520 El Paseo)customer and employees parking in our parking lot and along El Paseo creating a shortage of parking for our customers and employees. 2) The planning Commission and City staff recommended approval of the 14 parking space adjustment without performing a parking survey of the proposed property or the surrounding areas. 3) There is no mechanism in place now to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbucks employees are required to park at the Gardens ,there is no means to insure compliance. The employees and customers of Starbucks are going to park in the most convenient parking lot. Our parking is not only visible parking lot from Larkspur to San Pablo.We fully support new business coming to the area and believe the increase of traffic for all the businesses will be good. However, by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short"14 parking spaces"is not fair for existing businesses. Other potential sites ,with adequate parking should be explored. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely JPHUG �'` _ -Oct 24 01 12: 01rrp E G DEV CO at n5331375 p. 2 Ott 24 01 111032 E G DEV CO 310533) 375 p.2 ELTINGE & GRAZIADIo DEv!LOPM8NTG0UPAhv Po Oat 2747 T.r.wa.ce,CA 9051:1 2355 Coc.v.w[km.Sun,Id6,Tooa.uu.CA 60501 -- - 12 trkY,(71oI523-1375 Crry Of Palm Desert do Mr.Hr;,ur f{amik Roemer.Hang&Nether} 45-025 Manttou Drive Indian Wells, CA 91210 Attention: City Council Membc s ra Cue No. CUP 01-I5 North Etot Comer of CI Faux,runt son Pablo. 73-120 El Paseo Palm DCScit. CA Dtar City or Palm Doerr LOuncii Members: flue letter is written to prongs the abov:CUP request fir Clarbuek'e Cof1!ca This•,ill have a direct impact on my businesr. My store is located at 73.540 El Paseo kA, Palm Desert,CA. I bue my protest on tbe.fnl►owin@:.. I) My store is already nffectcd by Doug ArdnQo's(73-520 Fi Pasco)customers and employees patkistg in our perking lot and along El Pasco creating a shortage of parlong for our Customers unit employees. Thera arc employeoe parkins In our shopping caner Or along El Pasco and► akin aeries to the Gasdenr tainri parking away hem our business. 2) The Planning Commission and Cry staff rectmvrtcoded approval of the (4 parking Space adjustment without performing a parking curse the propr rod property or tho surrounding area, 3) Then:is no mechanism in place nntu to enforce parking problems. Even if Starbuck.cmplol ccs are required to park at the Gardens,there r6 no meant to Insure cwnplianci. The employees tautt r of Starbuek';are going to paririn-the Ton convenient parking lot. Our parking lot ill the only vitiblo parking lot from Lius. pur to San PanIO. We wily Support new bu,nasecs cum to the.aosaabbrliave.he increase of trtffrc for-all businesses will be good. however,by allowing Starbucks to move into a development knowing they are short`14 parking were" is not fair to the mutual buses' ,tither potential A,IL',.. W,rl,& aunt Pxt';oe be explored. Thank you for your cr ncidcreuim. 5 merely, : :: e12-2 r