PC 021308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Jeff Nibert spoke in support of this prof ect. He noted that his son and daughter were involved in the Tri-Valley Martial Arts program and noted that Mr. Pfund was a very positive influence in his children's lives. He noted that his son's 9'/z-year involvement with martial arts was the longest he had remained involved with any one activity, and he considered it to be a considerable accomplishment. He noted that the benefits of the program included it being a wholesome and fun activity, later instilling self-confidence. He noted that it was also aself-esteem- and character-building activity. With respect to the findings required to approve the conditional use permit, he noted that the staff report stated that none of the items had been found to be true. He noted that the staff report stated that the parking issue could be resolved if the academy reduced the maximum number of adult students to six. He noted that the adult programs were held two evenings per week, from 7:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m. and that five parking spaces were allocated. The staff report stated that six spaces must be allocated if there were 10 students. He noted that there was plentiful street parking at that time and that he had never had any problems parking on-site during the evening. He disagreed with the notion of not making a finding for lack of one parking space. He noted that he did not tell his children that they were free to come and go; he instructed them not to go anywhere until he picked them up. He noted that he had never had any problems with his children leaving the applicant's facility or any other facility; he believed that was common sense. Mr. Nibert noted that Section 2 stated that "the Tri-Valley Martial Arts was located in the middle of an industrial park and not a residential area and that motorists within the business park would not expect to encounter young people, which could lead to an injury. He noted that Quarry Lane School was located across the street and that a music academy was located in the same building; another athletic academy was located down the street. He noted that he expected to see young people in that area. He believed the statement in the first finding contradicted the statement in the second finding, which read, "The proposed martial arts school would provide instruction lessons to local children and adults, along with providing other child-related martial arts services." He noted that the City has allowed similar uses to be located in similar industrial and office areas. Mr. Nibert noted that Finding 3 stated that given the degree of inconsistency between what was originally submitted and the current plan, staff found that the "proposed use was detrimental to public heath, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in the vicinity." He believed that Mr. Pfund had demonstrated a commitment to adhere to the current plan and scope of operations, but because the new scope differed from the old scope, staff seemed to consider that a danger to public health, safety, and welfare. He found that a difficult statement to believe. Darrell Darling spoke in support of this project. He noted that he had been active in the sport of judo for over 50 years and had known Mr. Pfund since the early 1980s. He believed that Mr. Pfund was a competent business owner, displayed expertise and dedication to his art, and displayed great enthusiasm in passing his knowledge on to his students. With respect to the adequacy of parking at the Quarry Lane School, he had never experienced a problem with parking during the class times since the other businesses were closed. He did not believe that parking would become a problem, even PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 27 of 42