Laserfiche WebLink
permit, he noted that the staff report stated that none of the items had been found to be true. He <br />noted that the staff report stated that the parking issue could be resolved if the academy reduced <br />the maximum number of adult students to six. He noted that the adult programs were held two <br />evenings per week, from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.in. and that five parking spaces were allocated. The <br />staff report stated that six spaces must be allocated if there were 10 students. He noted that there <br />was plentiful street parking at that time and that he had never had any problems parking on-site <br />during the evening. He disagreed with the notion of not making a finding for lack of one parking <br />space. He noted that he did not tell his children that they were free to come and go; he instructed <br />them not to go anywhere until he picked them up. He noted that he had never had any problems <br />with his children leaving the applicant's facility or any other facility; he believed that was <br />common sense. <br />Mr. Nibert noted that Section 2 stated that "the Tri-Valley Martial Arts was located in the middle <br />of an industrial park and not a residential area and that motorists within the business park would <br />not expect to encounter young people, which could lead to an injury. He noted that Quarry Lane <br />School was located across the street and that a music academy was located in the same building; <br />another athletic academy was located down the street. He noted that he expected to see young <br />people in that area. He believed the statement in the first finding contradicted the statement in <br />the second finding, which read, "The proposed martial arts school would provide instruction <br />lessons to local children and adults, along with providing other child-related martial arts <br />services." He noted that the City has allowed similar uses to be located in similar industrial and <br />office areas. <br />Mr. Nibert noted that Finding 3 stated that given the degree of inconsistency between what was <br />originally submitted and the current plan, staff found that the "proposed use was detrimental to <br />public heath, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the <br />vicinity." He believed that Mr. Pfund had demonstrated a commitment to adhere to the current <br />plan and scope of operations, but because the new scope differed from the old scope, staff <br />seemed to consider that a danger to public health, safety, and welfare. He found that a difficult <br />statement to believe. <br />Darrell Darling spoke in support of this project. He noted that he had been active in the sport of <br />judo for over 50 years and had known Mr. Pfund since the early 1980s. He believed that <br />Mr. Pfund was a competent business owner, displayed expertise and dedication to his art, and <br />displayed great enthusiasm in passing his knowledge on to his students. With respect to the <br />adequacy of parking at the Quarry Lane School, he had never experienced a problem with <br />parking during the class times since the other businesses were closed. He did not believe that <br />parking would become a problem, even if he expanded his business. He believed the use at this <br />location would be a positive asset to the community. He noted that the academy taught self- <br />defense, discipline, respect, and better citizenship for mutual benefit and welfare of all. He <br />urged the Planning Commission to approve this application so the applicant may resume <br />operation of his business. <br />Shaibal Dutta spoke in support of this project and noted that his five-year-old son attended the <br />Academy, which had been a very positive experience for him and his family. He indicated his <br />family moved to Pleasanton in August 2007, that his son attended Lydiksen Elementary School, <br />EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 10 of 19 <br />