PC 101415 - Laserfiche WebLink

Ms. Harryman replied that is a fair statement and interpretation. She stated that per legislation, the State absolutely and strongly encourages these, and cities shall approve these unless they can show and make findings that they will create hazards. She noted that the Commission actually had one such case in 2006 where a large family daycare wanted to go in at Paseo Navarro, and there was strong opposition and argument from the neighbors about double - parking and speeding, and there was a lot of evidence in the record. She stated that the applicants were operating a small family daycare at the time and were applying to do a large family daycare similar to this situation. She noted that the item went all the way to the City Council; the Council denied the application; the operator sued the City; and the judge ruled in favor of the operator. She indicated that the operator essentially got the approval from the judge, who found the administrative record not to be sufficient in the City's favor to properly reject. Chair Allen commented that it appears the City has much more authority over daycare centers and tutoring facilities in commercial centers, and a number of them have come up in the last year or two. She noted that the Commission has a lot of control over defining parking and similar things than it does in this type of family daycare. Ms. Harryman said yes. She stated that there is language about wanting to promote this particular type of use in residential neighborhoods. She noted this is a good thing for children, as opposed to putting them in commercial centers. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Daniel Alioto, husband of the applicant, stated that the staff report is absolutely on point and that he and his wife whole - heartedly agree with it. He pointed out, however, that the staff report says that the daycare only passed a Fire Department pre- inspection, but Department representatives actually came out and did their final inspection of the home, and the Fire Department has given them their fire clearance for the home to be a large family daycare. He added that the Commission will hear a lot of testimony that there are a lot of negative impacts to the neighborhood, and he indicated that from their perspective, that is really not the case. He noted that they have a very few number of trips coming in and out of the home, and parking is very adequate and very safe. He indicated that all the parents have been instructed which parking spots they should use in front of the home and which ones they should not use around the neighborhood; that they recognize these are residential areas and that they should drive carefully, slowly, and respectfully, turn down their radios as they drive through the neighborhood, and not use other neighbors' parking or driveways as turn - arounds. Mr. Alioto stated that they are aware that their presence in the neighborhood is not really wanted or desired and that a lot of the neighbors have objected to their presence there. He indicated that he spent some time in the last couple of weeks walking around the neighborhood to meet some of the neighbors and to discuss their neighbors' specific problems with the existence of their daycare in their neighborhood; but he was unable to talk to most of them because they were not home during the hours of the day he was walking around. With respect to those neighbors with whom he was able to speak, he indicated that there were two classes of neighbors: (1) Those who are directly affected by the existence of their daycare, which are the neighbors directly to their left, their right, and behind them. He stated that they want to maintain a positive relationship with these PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2015 Page 21 of 35