Neighbors frothing over beer garden plan Restaurants, posted by Editor, Mountain View Voice Online, on May 31, 2012 at 2:05 pm
A handful of condo dwellers on Bryant Street have so far been successful in blocking a new restaurant and beer garden proposed for 895 Villa Street, but applicant Ted Kim is asking for the City Council to reverse the decision before summer break.
Read the full story here Web Link posted Friday, June 1, 2012, 12:00 AM
Posted by Mark, a resident of the Shoreline West neighborhood, on May 31, 2012 at 2:05 pm
I live about 6 blocks from downtown MV, and I can hear the thumping music and yelling coming from the late-night downtown businesses every night, but especially on Friday and Saturday nights. I can only imagine how loud it is to those folks who live in downtown. Were these loud, noisy businesses open late-night hours before these folks moved into downtown MV? If so, doesn't seem fair to change the rules after you've jumped into the game. Then again, my peace of mind, my quality of life, shouldn't suffer so that a small handful of downtown MV businesses can make money. The businesses are GOOD for the tax base, but BAD for the local citizenry who just want some peace and quiet to enjoy after a hectic workday.
Posted by Doctor Killjoy, a resident of the Sylvan Park neighborhood, on May 31, 2012 at 5:21 pm
If Mountain View at large wants to cut the crime rate down to a minimum overnight, all we need to do is get rid of the nightclubs that are patronized by out of town troublemakers. Problem sorted. A quiet beer garden like Tied House or Esther's Bakery on San Antonio Rd. (which has a beer garden, NOT the related Esther's in the San Antonio Shopping Center), then I say fine.
Posted by William, a resident of the The Crossings neighborhood, on May 31, 2012 at 6:15 pm
But then where will all the 20 and 30 something Googlers and renters go for fun? Are they all expected to retreat to their rental cells every night and only come out for the Farmers' Market?
I'm all for a beer garden. And if the noise bothers you, I will give the same comeback that I get when I complain about the Caltrain noise. If you bought a house near a vibrant downtown full of restaurants and bars or support the development of Castro Street, don't complain after the fact.
Posted by haoleboy, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jun 1, 2012 at 6:24 am
If you haven't been subjected to the crap that goes on between 2&4 AM weekends and some weeknights as well you should stay out of the discussion! There never used to be people drinking in their cars and vomiting, defecating, you name it until all these bars opened. Once they're there it takes the city forever to shut down a bad one such as the Slimelite now reincarnated as the Monte Carlo. The lowlifes that come here from other cities have no consideration for others and continually demonstrate it. This wasn't going on when I bought my house and I don't care to add to what is already a streesful situation.
Posted by Max Hauser, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jun 1, 2012 at 9:44 am Max Hauser is a member (registered user) of Mountain View Online
I attended the May-9 Steins zoning hearing, and the hearing immediately after, about specific hours of the Monte Carlo nightclub. Observations from those hearings:
1. As the Voice reported above, a handful of (about four) 230-Bryant residents (Lin, not Lynn, was the written family name that I saw more than once) objected to Steins. Almost all of their comments concerned past alcohol-related disturbances from Monte Carlo nightclub (which has had 1-2AM closing times). Michele Lin, one of the speakers, had also filed a written objection to the Steins alcohol license, citing specific late-night problems from Monte Carlo (it did not explain how those concern Steins).
2. At the later hearing, on Monte Carlo itself, many specifics raised at the Steins hearing were repeated verbatim by the same group of people.
3. Several (10?) diverse Mountain View residents spoke supporting Steins. Essentially, all of the objection to Steins came from the handful 230-Bryant residents; essentially all of the other speakers supported Steins.
4. Resistance to Steins isn't universal even at 230 Bryant. At least one resident sent testimony (through another speaker) supporting the beer garden. (Separately, an upstairs resident at the Bryant-Dana corner, also overlooking the Monte Carlo parking lot, had written to the neighborhood email list "We wouldn't trade it for anything. We wanted urban feel, we got urban feel ... If they didn't want to live in an urban environment, why the heck would they buy a residence there?")
5. Zoning Administrator Peter Gilli, before his ruling, acknowledged some conflicting interests raised by speakers, including that 230 Bryant is in a transitional area combining businesses and residences. He did not acknowledge Julie Lovins' testimony that she lives near another, existing beer garden downtown and that they've been "wonderful neighbors."
6. Gilli also failed to acknowledge or recognize another principle here. The 230-Bryant condos are relatively recent, I saw them go up. (Mr Gilli himself, I believe, is fairly new to MV and may not be conscious of that change.) But restaurants and bars operated at night around Villa and Bryant long before those condos. (Tied House, Chez TJ with its outdoor deck used for receptions, Golden Wok restaurant, and of course the Monte Carlo's predecessor). Therefore, like the Bryant/Dana resident I quoted above, 230 Bryant's condo occupants knowingly chose to live in an existing nightlife district.
I resonate with concerns about residential noise. But the last point, and also that the 230-Bryant groups's complaints were mostly about Monte Carlo, repeated at the Monte Carlo hearing unconnected with Steins, weakens their argument I think.
Posted by Sam, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jun 1, 2012 at 9:57 am
So let me get this straight, if you don't LIVE downtown then you can't possibly have an accurate opinion of noise or crowd control? Ridiculous...
First, I believe that there are THREE bars downtown... hardly a college downtown strip. No strip bars or crazy clubs. It's not Palo Alto University St. for goodness sakes. If there are fights and public indecency, etc., then call the police.
Second, there have been bars downtown for decades (hello, anyone remember Town Club?). The downtown may not have been a buzzing profit generator before, but it WAS a downtown regardless. It's not a surprise to anyone! Especially those who voluntarily MOVED there!
Thirdly, this city continues to grow rapidly. We bring in new restaurants and shops weekly that kill many of the old and charming Castro mom and pop stores. More companies pop up...and with them, the annoyingly loud traffic congesting construction of new eyesore blights rising tall where old MV sites used to sit. We have completely changed our old charm neighborhood beauty (not always for the better). HOWEVER many know that these businesses, "bars", and expansions mean more profit for the city and additional monies to support its programs/events and beauty.
If we continue to stifle this city, we will have the snoozefest downtown from 20 years ago and then all that will be left to complain about will be the LACK of bars, profits, parades, and people. I agree we can't go crazy and let it become University St. but I hardly think an upscale beer garden would accomplish that.
Compromise, people. WE MVers compromised when the neighborhood was uprooted to support your humongous condos... give back a little.
Posted by Monica, a resident of the North Whisman neighborhood, on Jun 2, 2012 at 3:39 am
I agree with William and Max. Downtown bars were there before 230 Bryant was even built. There are plenty of quiet neighborhoods in MV, many within convenient walking distance of downtown. If you didn't want to live in a nightlife area, why knowingly choose to live there?
In addition, downtown MV could use an upscale beer garden. Our downtown is one of the least gentrified in the area, with a surprisingly clubby/douchey nightlife, no less. It's embarrassing how much cuter other downtowns look in comparisonólook at Redwood City, Los Altos, Sunnyvale, etc.
Posted by smadison, a resident of the Old Mountain View neighborhood, on Jun 4, 2012 at 1:15 pm smadison is a member (registered user) of Mountain View Online
[Reposting earlier comments from the other, identical article...]
I purchased my home in Mountain View in 1990, specifically because of the downtown revitalization efforts that had just been launched. Over the past two decades, I have enjoyed the proximity to public transportation, services, and downtown destinations that have made Mountain View a bustling urban destination. I enjoy equally the sounds of the mockingbird who chirps a thousand songs outside my bedroom window every morning, as well as the toot of the trains as they rumble down the tracks. The swishing noises of cars zooming down 85 and 237 are as peaceful to me as crashing waves on a secluded beach.
If I didn't enjoy all that comprises the essence of Mountain View, I could instead have chosen to live in any number of other strip-mall ladden, ticky-tacky housing, dull suburban destinations in the area.
If you don't enjoy the vibrancy of our town, why persist in residing here (except for the opportunity to be a thorn in everyone's side). Those condos were built well AFTER the site of the proposed Stein's location, which has historically hosted indoor and outdoor dining, so there's no argument to be made that she didn't know what she was buying into.
I'm appalled that someone would move into MY neighborhood and then try to bend it to their will. This offends me. If you don't like it, move. We won't see the back of you soon enough.
Peter Gilli and Noah Downing, SHAME on you for kowtowing to the sentiments of a few non-representative members of our community over the wishes of all.
Now, is there a fund to which I can donate, to help cover the cost of Kim's appeal?