Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Beaudin explained it is a community need and a demand which has increased significantly <br />in the State. Neighbors were resistant to changes in single-family neighborhoods, especially <br />associated with small and large family daycares, so the State identified large daycares up to a <br />certain capacity and put legislation in place to ensure those uses are treated like single-family <br />homes to help address community needs for child care. <br />Chair Allen inquired how many large family daycares the City currently has in operation and <br />whether any have ever been denied, and if so, what was the rationale. <br />Mr. Beaudin responded that, according to the State's permitting system, the City currently has <br />17 large family daycares. He explained that the City has denied two large family daycare <br />applications in the past, one of which resulted in a legal challenge; and one which was <br />withdrawn following the denial. <br />Assistant City Attorney Julie Harryman indicated that she was aware of two denials. She <br />explained the first instance when City Council denied an application in 2005, which was <br />appealed by neighbors, and the applicant sued. The City litigated and lost because the Judge <br />disagreed with the traffic issues the neighbors had alleged; the applicant went on to open a <br />large family daycare home for 14 children in 2005. She went on to explain that in 2014, one <br />large family daycare went before the Planning Commission, which they denied based on legal <br />factors. The applicant had proposed to use guest parking as a place for their patrons to drop- <br />off and pick-up, which was seemingly distant from the residence with no sidewalk for parents <br />to safely walk with their children. Based upon the Commission's denial, the applicant decided <br />not to pursue the case further. <br />Commissioner Ritter inquired when the court overruled the denial in 2005, whether it was <br />based upon any findings. <br />Ms. Harryman responded that local control is often discussed by the City and a particular set of <br />Health and Safety codes has allowed for large family daycares. She said the State restricts the <br />criteria for considering these applications to the certain areas identified in the agenda report, <br />which include spacing and concentration, traffic control, parking and noise control. The State <br />has restricted the City from identifying factors such as decreased property values or other <br />similar areas of concern for neighbors. Based on this, she asked that the Commission stay <br />within their purview based on the State statute. <br />Commissioner Balch referred to the topic regarding traffic, referencing a one-way street that <br />had been mentioned, and requested it be displayed on a map for visual reference. <br />Ms. Soo displayed the map showing Vineyard Avenue, and pointed out Touriga Drive, which is <br />a two-way street, Chardonnay Drive also a two-way street and Sauterne Way, which used to <br />be a two-way street but is now restricted where people cannot exit onto Vineyard Avenue. She <br />stated there is no physical barrier, but the street is striped, making it a street to enter onto, but <br />there's no source to exit. <br />Commissioner Brown asked for staff to further clarify the traffic route in this area. <br />Planning Commission Minutes Page 3 of 18 March 13, 2019