AgdaPkt 2009-07-13 clsd and jnt - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

Be Page 29 3. The Proposed Use is Excessive for the Neili!:hborhood: The Use Permit Findings state that the proposed use will not be detrimental or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood because the kindergarten through twelfth grade private school and child care facility uses are related to other types of public and quasi-public uses that are permitted and currently present in the vicinity of the subject property. This is not a commercial area. Despite the described higher-intensity land uses nearby, ours is a quiet street which is in no way impacted by the noise of or traffic to the Roo.sevelt Shopping Center. The problems with traffic on McGarvey are well known to both residents and to the city, and will clearly be exacerbated by an increase in traffic to this site. More importantly, the finding that "Project-related activities which could potentially have an adverse impact on the neighborhood In terms of noise and aesthetic impacts will be substantially controlled to a less than significant level." (page 5) suggests that the zoning administrator did not hear or consider the testimony of the many neighbors regarding the ongoing adverse impact of the current student population. These adverse noise impacts have not been substantially controlled, despite two years of requests by neighbors, and doubling the size of the school will more than double the disturbance to the residents. 4. Outdoor Plav2round Activities: Neighbors testified at length about the noise concerns generated by the current student population. This has been an ongoing problem since the inception of the school, and the applicant testified that they have minimized outdoor time on site. The Exhibit 1 attached to the Notice of OffICial Action outlines continuous outdoor activity from 9:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. every day, without inclusion of the child care component. Condition 28 to the NOA states that Hif it is determined by the City that such outdoor activities are generating excessive noises the applicant shall be required to either modify the outdoor activities (i.e. reduce the overall amount of time and/or nature of outdoor activities onsite, relocate a portion of said activities to an off-site location) and/or submit a noise attenuation study for review and approval by the Zoning Administrator." This is, quite frankly, ridiculous. The City staff has been invited numerous times to come to our homes and experience the noise firsthand. Not having done that, the Zoning Administrator has ignored the extensive testimony about the detriment and suggested that "if it is determined by the City" that there is a problem, the applicant might have to do something about it. There is no basis for disregarding the neighbors' significant expressed concern about the detriment they have experienced on a daily basis due to the noise from the school. The applicant's response has been less than cooperative and specifically, in a sarcaStic email contained in the public file, he commented: "Do they want us to have the children mime at recess?" They have not voluntarily conferred with or communicated with any of the neighbors about these issues, much less made accommodations in response to our concerns. .';,..' Appeal of Notice of Official.Action from 2/9/09 -2