PC 021308 - Laserfiche WebLink

been in two daycares already, which was not a successful experience and did not work for him. He stated that the word "daycare" not being part of the business title piqued their interest, and the fact that the Tri-Valley Martial Arts academy stated it was not a daycare was a positive aspect for their family. He noted that the instruction techniques used by the applicant blended traditional martial arts instruction as well as other activities such as with balls, climbing walls, and ropes that helped maintain the focus for younger children from six to twelve and thirteen years. He noted that his son's grades had skyrocketed since attending this program. He observed that the applicant displayed a great deal of integrity and that he trusted and respected him. He noted that although he did sign the waiver saying that children could come and go as they please, he indicated that he knew in reality that was not the case. Amy Fluker spoke in support of this prof ect. She believed that Mr. Pfund ran an excellent program and added that her young five-year-old Kindergartner daughter was a student at the academy. She noted that her daughter had gained confidence, focus, and integrity and was much less shy than when she began the program. She noted that her son was in a daycare, and she did not consider this program to be a daycare. She noted that the parking situation at Quarry Lane School was very congested and that he never had a problem finding parking at the applicant s site. Nancy Pfund spoke in support of this prof ect and noted that she was the applicant s mother. She noted that she was a retired elementary and middle school teacher from the Livermore Unified School District and that her son made it a practice to do the right thing. She said her son has made up many new narratives over and over and has been up till the middle of the night creating narratives. She expressed pride in her son's endeavor to follow his dream and make a positive impact on the community; she added that he had a strong spirit and urged the Commission to approve this application. Jack Balch noted that he represented the building owner, Big Valley LP, and believed this use was a good fit for the building. He realized that the City must consider the parking only on the parcel rather than the street parking or adj acent parcels. He noted that the applicant was a tenant in good standing and had always paid his rent on time. He added that he had addressed all of his concerns and he was comfortable with the use. He did not believe there was a parking issue and noted that the applicant would be able to parkin the spaces belonging to the other parcels which he also owned. He noted that the hours of operation for pickup occurred during low parking usage times for the other businesses. He noted that he always drove carefully in the area because of the children across the street at the school. He stated that the applicant did not have any outstanding Building Code issues to his knowledge and that the building was up to Code. He believed the applicant was trying to do the right thing as he understood the rules and that he personally found it difficult to make sense of all the City codes and regulations. He understood the City's concerns because of all of the numerous narratives, but believed Mr. Pfund had tried to work with staff as best he could and that staff had brought forward some excellent points. He indicated that he was not an attorney and that the Codes are difficult to understand; that is why there are three or four versions of Mr. Pfund's plan. He encouraged the Commission to approve this application. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 29 of 42