PC 092309 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Narum stated that this leads to a determination of what relying on the facility for child care is. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Peter MacDonald stated that both he and Brad Hirst both had the experience of guiding clients through the City’s approval process for after-school care and tutoring facilities. He noted that for the small-business applicant, the process is lengthy, taking over six months, and is uncertain, expensive, and agonizing. He indicated that he welcomed the Council’s directive that the approval process for after-school care be simplified; however, he felt the child care policy before the Commission was anything but a simplification of the process and literally adds a new process of State licensing without reducing the City’s process. He added that it eliminates after-school care from the most functional locations in the City like Hacienda Business Park, the shopping centers, and the Downtown. Mr. MacDonald stated that by requiring State licensing, after-school facilities would need to provide 75 square feet of outdoor play space per child, making the few remaining locations in the City unfeasible. He added that it raises the cost of after-school care substantially by subjecting new operators to huge traffic fees and potentially to impossible building improvement requirements. He indicated that he does not think this is what the Council had in mind when it commissioned this policy. He noted that the draft policy contains everything that was rejected by the City Council when Anne Fox proposed that those policies apply to the Little Ivy League School. Mr. MacDonald stated that while Brad Hirst and he have represented after school providers in the past, the Commission and the City Council represent the parents. He noted that an intelligent after-school policy needs to start from the perspective of working parents who need after-school care and want abundant options close to home at reasonable cost with provisions for safety and security. He indicated that the alternative for most parents is to have their children waste time watching TV as latchkey children or worse. He added that from a land use perspective, after-school care without playgrounds is a completely innocuous use and less significant than most office uses in terms of parking, traffic, and impact upon neighboring businesses. He stated that the policy needs to focus on what parents are interested in, which is the safety of their children and not the location of the facility. He added that an intelligent after-school policy looks like the Little Ivy League School Conditional Use Permit, which the Planning Commission fine-tuned with excellent results. Mr. MacDonald stated that his letter quoted a list of standards which was developed by Planning staff, a list that the Commission expressed preference for the last time the issue was heard. He read some of the standards into the record and suggested adding “disclosure” to the list so parents know what standards the providers are required to meet and have access to the non-confidential information required from the providers. He stated that there is no reason to put every provider through a six-month process to come up with this same list of requirements and have different standards for each PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, September 23, 2009 Page 23 of 34