Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Harryman replied that if the Planning Commission was inclined to deny this <br />application, it would have to make findings based on one of those five criteria mentioned <br />earlier: spacing to avoid over - concentration, and staff's already confirmed that there are <br />no other daycares in the immediate vicinity; traffic so as not to create a hazard; ap rking <br />if they were within a reasonable distance to the home; noise if they are able to meet the <br />City noise ordinance; and Fire code, which the Livermore Pleasanton Fire Department <br />apparently has inspected and has found adequate. <br />Commissioner O'Connor inquired if the State actually approves home size. <br />Commissioner Ritter questioned if a 500 - square -foot house could have 12 children in it. <br />Ms. Harryman replied that she was not familiar with the State requirements. <br />Commissioner Ritter stated that he did a quick calculation that there are 897 square feet <br />of inside space being used for these 12 children up to five years of age, including four <br />infants. He noted that the layout of the house is perfect for a small daycare, but it does <br />not seem very logical for a large daycare based on the layout of the house, and they <br />cannot use the 441 - square foot of garage as daycare space. He noted that he had an <br />1,800- square -foot house with two children under five years old, and there was not <br />enough space for them. He added that he is trying to get some other ideas and knows <br />that the State is telling cities what they have to do, but he wanted to know if those are <br />options to look at. <br />Mr. Beaudin stated that daycares are very carefully regulated by the State: there would <br />be a home inspection, and the permitting process would include an inspection of both <br />indoor and outdoor spaces for the number of children the applicants are requesting. <br />Commissioner Ritter inquired if the Commission did not approve the application, if the <br />applicant could appeal the decision to the State and if the Staff would come back and <br />review the application once more. <br />Mr. Beaudin replied that what the Assistant City Attorney is saying is that we would not <br />be able to deny the application based on our understanding of how much space is <br />available for the children. He explained that the State, as part of its review which is <br />completely separate from the City's, would look at the application for a large family <br />daycare and make a determination about whether or not this site has the necessary <br />space and other requirements to have a large family daycare. <br />Chair Allen inquired how much flexibility the City has to further mitigate noise issues if <br />they were to occur and if there were complaints from residents, for example, potentially <br />limiting play to indoors only. <br />Mr. Beaudin replied that the applicant is correct in saying that there has to be a baseline <br />level of noise from children playing in a yard, and the City cannot say that the children <br />could not go outside during the day. He noted that the General Plan identifies a noise <br />level of a moderate 60 dBA. He added that there are conditions of approval that do limit <br />the number of children in the yard at one time, so it is almost like there would be a shift <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, October 14, 2015 Page 31 of 35 <br />