One year later, parking lot fence gains acceptance

After enduring a storm of criticism early last school year, the fence in the front parking lot has slowly won a greater degree of acceptance from students.

Erected during November and December of 2010, the fence has largely succeeded in achieving its original purpose: to improve the safety of students, according to school officials.

“Before there were several palm trees there and the students would walk out behind the palm trees right in front of cars, causing the cars to just stop,” campus supervisor Mark Hernandez said. “There’s nothing else you could have put there aside from a fence to stop students from crossing the street [like that].”

The administration recognized the necessity for such a construction after considering hazardous crossing situations during pick-up and drop-off periods. Hernandez, who observed “people coming late, people who weren’t paying attention, and a great chance of someone getting hit,” endorsed the project.

“Your safety comes first because it’s our responsibility to ensure that you guys can come to school, drive to school, walk to school, whatever, and be safe,” Hernandez said.

Despite the administration’s intentions, students last year reacted negatively to what they perceived as a new and unnecessary inconvenience. More than 80 percent of students who responded to a poll disliked the new fence.

“The first year, there was a lot of resentment,” Hernandez said. “Kids before wanted to just walk across. Now they have to walk all the way around.”

Senior Michael Zuccarino felt at first that the fence “added an unnecessary detour.”
“Like everybody else, I thought they could have spent money on other things,” Zuccarino said.

Junior Johnny Chang agrees that it is “tempting to take a direct and the shortest path” to one’s car. However, like many other students today, he believes safety is worth the inconvenience.

“Yeah, students need to walk all the way around, but if the trade-off is safety, forcing students to walk around is worth it,” Chang said, adding that the school should not “trade safety for speed.”

Hernandez agrees, mentioning that “the cost of that fence is nothing compared to a kid getting killed, a kid getting seriously injured, or possible lawsuits by parents for not having proper safety precautions.”

Once opposed to the fence, Zuccarino has grown accustomed to it and now recognizes its importance for student safety.

“I felt [the fence] was a bit of an inconvenience, but if they took it down, I’d probably start crossing the street at random points,” Zuccarino said. “I don’t know if I’d quite trust the parents who are playing rush hour traffic.”

Parents, too, have expressed gratitude for the fence. According to Hernandez, they now appreciate knowing “where the kids come out, so they look to make sure there are no kids at those two points, which are crosswalks.”

“Most parents I’ve talked to are all for [the fence],” Hernandez said. “Because they feel safer because when they drive close to the fence, they don’t have to worry about kids stepping out in front of them.”

Hernandez believes that as time passes, student criticism of the fence will naturally subside.

“Now it’s kind of wearing out because kids are getting used to it,” Hernandez said. “And by two more years, no one will even know, no one will care. They’ll just know there’s a fence there.”