PC 02/26/97 - Laserfiche WebLink

encouraged by putting the entrance on Stone Pointe Way. She wants the entrance and exit on Stoneridge Drive only. Ms. Butler believes it is unenforceable to restrict parents from using Stone Pointe Way. This is a business, the site was chosen because of economic reasons, it is less expensive than Hacienda. This site is not appropriately sized for this project. ELI has no experience in the issues of students up to the eighth grade. ELI's compromise of paving some of the athletic field if there is a parking problem is too little too late. She does not feel that there is enough knowledge to say that 200 students will not impact the neighborhood. She cannot afford the loss in property values nor the safety of her child with this application. Also, Ms. Butler feels the chain link fence is an eyesore; all fencing in the neighborhood should blend together. Sophie Chantrenne, 432 Los Rios Court, has two children attending ELI. She has not found anything wrong with the school, and admits to being very critical. The children are taught to live in a social environment. She finds there are few choices for the children of parents who both work. Cited national education statistics that point to problems in education. She feels that being located near a good school increased property values. Many of her colleagues have heard of the good reputation of ELI in Palo Alto. She stated that few parents attend field trips, parents are not asked to help at the school, ELI has excellent experience from their Palo Alto school. She has been disappointed to hear that the children have been described as monsters, needing to be located out in a field away from everything with a ten foot high fence. Ms. Chantrenne feels the ELI representatives have tried to listen to everyone and taken everyone's concerns into consideration. Pat Dickens, 7653 Hillsdale Court, feels the revised plan is a good use for the site. Relocating the buildings, reducing the size of the school is appropriate usage of the site. Pleasanton is growing. What most concerns her is to make sure that as people come into a site that they are the right ~ people/business for that site, they will be sensitive to the neighbors, they will make concessions, and they will try to plan things appropriately on the site. As to the Hacienda school site, she's never stacked up entering or exiting with more than one or two cars, she has always found ample parking. The traffic flow for this school is fundamentally different than what everyone is afraid of. She urged the Planning Commission to accept this good project, because the next one may not be as good. Rebuttal by Dr. Bernstein: Noted one person in the neighborhood called him in support of the school, saying she had signed the petition in error. Regarding the fence, it is three to four feet below grade and with shrubbery, it will not even be noticeable. The location of the entrance and exit was what was presented by the City traffic staff and ELI accepted their design. He, too, lives behind a school and finds it a positive experience. Commissioner Wright inquired about the field trip parking. Dr. Bernstein stated the school typically would not have mass field trips. In the worst case, with all the school going, they would have 15-24 parents attending and they have more than ample parking for the extra parents attending. Regarding the lunch time plans, there is an overhang off the back of the building facing the arroyo where the children will sit to have lunch on good weather days. As to comments concerning Saturday maintenance, Dr. Bernstein does not anticipate any weekend maintenance because they don't do it now. The janitorial work is done after hours during the week and landscaping upkeep is also done during the weekday. Other than parking lot sweeping once per month, Dr. Bernstein does not anticipate any weekend maintenance use. Lighting is not to be intrusive to the neighbors and are on timers that go off at 7 p.m. The application does have a condition permitting security lighting, although it is not in the current plan. Page 7 February 26, 1997 Planning Commission Minutes