06 ATTACHMENT 5 - Laserfiche WebLink

Attachment #5—The City's mistakes In 2004, the City incorrectly approved a building permit, without design review. This allowed the Masons to break through the back wail of the banquet room to add glass French doors and access the backyard. But more importantly, this allowed the Masons to make the building changes without any public notice or hearing, that is, without public scrutiny. a. This action violated the due process rights of residents, denying the Millers and other residents in Pleasanton the opportunity to comment on the significant use change. ?. In 2005, the City incorrectly approved, without public notice or hearing, a commercial catering company to reside in the building. a. In fact, the only documentation granting the Masons a catering company is a letter sent by Planner Jenny Soo without the normal use variance form, that is, Application for Zoning Approval. b. This action violated the due process rights of residents, denying the Millers and other residents in Pleasanton the opportunity to comment on the significant use change. :3. Why were two major changes made at the Masonic Lodge without any public notice or scrutiny? a. The City clearly understands the need for public notice as demonstrated by events with the Evangelical Free Church. b. The Evangelical Free Church i. On October 4, 2011, Planning Director Brian Dolan sent a letter to David Vesperman, who was soliciting development proposals for the vacant property at 6900 Valley Trails Drive, Pleasanton, in the Valley Trails neighborhood, on behalf of the Evangelical Free Church of Pleasanton. In the letter, Brian states, ii. 1 want to clarify for you and any potential buyers, the City's position on future development for the site. The General Plan Land use designation for the site is 'Public and Institutional,' which would allow the development of a school, a church, and other similar uses. Development of any other different uses would rewire extensive public dialogue with the neighborhood and consideration of a General Plan amendment by the Planning Commission and City Council. While we recognize that the current zoning is R -1 -6,500 (One - Family Residential) District, California state law clearly directs the City to defer to the General Plan designation when there is a conflict between the general plan designation and the zoning of the property." iii. Both the Masonic lodge and the above referenced church are designated "Public and Institutional." iv. Yet the City granted the Masons' request for a catering company: 1. Without any public dialogue 2. Without a General Plan Amendment v. Mr. Dolan is applying one set of rules to the Evangelical Free Church and another to the Masonic Lodge. How is this justified? Page l2ofl8