PC 101415 - Laserfiche WebLink

currently have seven children at the home, so that would either double the amount of time the children are in the yard playing or it would double the noise level while they are playing, and either scenario would not really be conducive and would have a large impact on them. Mr. Sobrero stated that another thing he is concerned about is if he decides to sell his house, he will have to put on his disclosure statement that there is a large daycare next -door, which will impact the marketability of his house. He pointed out that the petition was signed by almost every neighbor in the area who may be indirectly impacted by the traffic and the nuisance created by the daycare home. He questioned whether there would be an additional full -time teacher there with the expansion to a large daycare. He also questioned the intent of the garage and noted that during the process when the daycare was first started, the intent came out that the garage was going to be used as part of the daycare, and, therefore, no cars were going to be parked there. He added that there generally is one car parked in the driveway and three cars parked across the street from their house. Robin Neal stated that she has lived in the area for 33 years and is five houses away from the applicant's residence. She indicated that she and her husband are both retired, and they can hear the children at play. She noted that while it is a nice to hear them playing, children screaming is not something they, as retirees, want to hear all day. Ms. Neal stated that traffic on Muirwood Drive is also dangerous. She indicated that she is aware the children are not crossing the street, but noted that last year, a young driver coming down the street ran into the back of a car parked in front of the applicant's house and in front of the Sobreros' home, totaling the car. She stated that she is fine with having daycare around, but making it a large daycare is not acceptable in their neighborhood. Bonnie Kramer stated that there are a couple of things she wanted to address after hearing everyone speak. She noted that Mr. Alioto had indicated that there was no hazard with the current way the cars are being parked, but she would like to argue that point because she believes there is a traffic hazard with the cars they have parked across the street from the house as they block the view coming out of Arrowwood Court, and drivers cannot see down the street. She stated that she has made three phone calls to Mr. Weinstein because she and her neighbors could not get out of the court. She noted that she has to be probably a good three - fourths outside the court before she can see around the applicants' cars. She indicated that she was counting on the fact that the garage would be used for parking so that two of those cars would now be in the garage and the employees' cars can be parked on the driveway. Ms. Kramer stated that the other thing she just wanted to address is Mr. Alioto's statement that there were two groups of people directly or indirectly affected by the noise. She indicated that they live across the street and can also hear the noise when their windows are open. She stated that she works from home and has conference calls at 6:00 a.m. with East Coast people, and she has to shut her windows so car door slamming and similar things do not disrupt the call. She emphasized Mr. Sobrero's point regarding property values, noting that for the vast majority of the neighbors, their PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2015 Page 27 of 35