06 ATTACHMENT 5 - Laserfiche WebLink

¢ � c Mr. Fred Shwartz November 5, 2008 Page Two Additionally, the City has concerns related to those improvements recently constructed that have no active building permit. The expiration of that permit alerted the Planning Division via a code enforcement review of the file. The improvements are not consistent with the conditions of approval for your existing conditional use permit (UP- 77 -13). The process for a modification to the conditional use permit needs to be reviewed by the Planning Division with action taken by the Planning Commission. UP -77 -13 was approved by the Planning Commission on September 14, 1977 under Resolution No. 1562. Design review was approved by the Design Review Board on November 29, 1977 under Resolution No. R- 77 -62. Copies of the Conditional Use Permit, Staff Reports, and Resolutions are available to you at 200 Old Bernal Avenue for review. A review of the related staff reports and resolutions made it clear that there were concerns related to potential noise generated at the site and the negative impact that noise could have on the residential properties to the north. The staff reports referred to ways to minimize noise and conditions of approval addressed the issue by restricting the uses in that area. Condition no. 1 is specific to the design of the building so that activities will be focused toward the southern portion of the subject property, and Condition no. 20 required the applicant to provide an effective buffer between the development and the surrounding residential area. However, the buffer was not defined nor it does not appear to exist in any topographic or landscaped form. In 2004, the Pleasanton Lodge applied for, and received, building permits to remodel the kitchen, remove an emergency exit in the kitchen on the north side of the building, and install new double doors in the connected dining hall, also on the north side of the building. It received an over -the- counter Planning Approval in August 2003, but was Iimited to the removal of a kitchen exterior door, and did not address the installation of new dining hall double doors. Nine months later a building permit was issued which included the new double doors in the dining hall. The lodge had several inspections, but failed to have some required inspections including the final inspection. The permit has since expired, although all the work was completed. The new dining hall doors are made of glass and have side window panels and do not provide mitigation from interior noise generated by the events held at the Lodge. The City initiated contact with representatives in order to discuss the issues of your site. To date, we have been unsuccessful in finding a time that suits your schedule. If we are unable to discuss the issues related to the noise complaints and the installation of the doors that are located in direct conflict, with your conditional use permit, other actions may be necessary. The City has begun a code enforcement action that is currently active. An alternative to the continuation of the code enforcement action may be that the City would submit your original project use permit to the Planning Commission for consideration and discussion. This may result in the placement of additional conditions that meet today's stringent operations requirements, or, the Planning Commission may consider a revocation of the original use permit-