SR 05:220 - Laserfiche WebLink

THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED. Patricia Sutton, applicant, noted that with a license for 14 children, she may have up to four infants, She chooses to care for up to four years of age and added that she was working towards her kindergarten degree. Douglas Sutton, applicant, read several letters in support of this project from Mr. and Mrs. Holmes, residents at 5562 Paseo Navarro; Mr. and Mrs. Sean Keith of 5628 Paseo Navarro; Mrs, Joanne Griffin of 5622 Paseo Navarro; and Mr. Eric Heinitz, English, Latin, and Gifted & Talented Education (California Distinguished School), Mr. Sutton noted that the noise level is very low and added that when he was sick at home, he did not hear the activities in the house, He noted that there were no nine-year-olds and that the children were generally quiet. Diane McKittrick, 5550 Paseo Navarro, noted that she had a child who was physically disabled and was concerned about the increase of traffic over the years, She added that she lived directly across the street from the Suttons' and had observed the cars driving too fast or tailgating. She would like the customers to be more considerate and was very concerned for her son's safety while bicycling. She and her husband were concerned about traffic, speed, double-parking, and safety, especially with respect to parents who were in a rush, She noted that the street was not designed for that flow of traffic, She added that many cars came to the daycare throughout the day as well. She emphasized that this was a residential neighborhood and inquired whether the children would be playing on the play structures. She expressed concern about the blind spots, She noted that her husband had stayed home a few days previous and had been tailgated by two different daycare parents. She inquired who would make the parents adhere to the speed limits, Kirsten Maghi, 5580 Paseo Navarro, noted that she lived directly adjacent to the Suttons' home and added that Mrs. Sutton had notified the immediate neighbors that they planned to expand her daycare. She noted that two of the applicants' existing customers were pregnant and wished to accommodate their new children. She expressed concern that the applicant stated that additional children beyond the two would be able to be added, up to the limit of 14 children, She hoped that they could reach a compromise and expressed concern about safety, traffic, and parking. She noted that there was another day care 349 feet away and a second day care on the other side of the house. She believed this proposed day care would constitute the equivalent of a fourth day care. She had submitted a video to staff showing the parking lot effect in front of the Suttons' home, illegal parking, and leaving cars running with the doors open and inquired whether it would be displayed at the meeting, She has three children, the youngest of which was three years old, and had chosen this street because of the low traffic flow. She expressed concern about the negative effect on her quality of life, She had hoped that the applicants could have sought approval for only two more children, She distributed pictures of the site to the Commission. Commissioner Fox noted that State law indicates that the concentration is regulation for large family daycare spacing, not large family to small family daycare spacing, She inquired whether the 300-foot spacing was required between small family day cares as well, Ms. Nerland replied that the State has generally tied localities' regulatory hands in this regard and determined that a small family day care was no different than if a family has six children. The State policy EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES, May 25, 2005 Page 2 of6