PC 071305 - Laserfiche WebLink

"fhe State has determined that the City does not have as much discretion to control larger family daycares as the size of families inay not be controlled by the City_ THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS OPENED_ Vilas Thuse, applicant, requested permission to use the curbside parking area directly adjacent to their house for drop-off acid pick-up if the driveway was completely occupied. I Ic noted that they would obtain the parents' signatures as part of their enrollment agreement, stating that they would observe the conditions for pick-up and drop-off. He noted that they were committed to maintaining the security and safety of their community. Chairperson Maas noted that she had visited the applicants' home earlier in the day (at approximately 5.45 p_m_~ when the applicant was explaining the pick-up/drop-off policy and the City's rules to a parent. Martin Patrick, 5044 G'arducci Drive, spoke in opposition to this item. He expressed concern about traffic safety on the narrow street. He noted that these private streets were zoned for 15 mph and were maintained by the residents, as were the facilities. He ohjected to the residents in the development being asked to supplement this business and added that they expected to have peace and quiet in their neighborhood. I Ie noted that people living in the development did not expect to live next door to a business and expressed concern about property values of homes next to daycare businesses. Ashish Goel, 5216 Genovesio Drive, spoke in opposition to this item. He expressed concern about traffic safety, especially when parents are running late on the way to work. He noted that cars parked on both sides of the narrow street created a traffic and safety issue. He believed there would be a noise issue as well. _ioc McGovern, 5074 Carlucci Drive, spoke in opposition to this item and expressed concern about the use. of open space and the swimming pool in the common areas. He inquired how many vehicles were owned by the applicants and whether the garage was part of this facility. He was concerned -about the language holding the homeowners association harmless, given the litigious nature of society. Ms_ Decker was unsure how many vehicles were owned by the applicants and noted that they sent an a-mail stating that there ware three vehicles. She noted that under Condition No. 1 1, any daycare employees must use the garage or onstreet parking in front of the residence to triitigate use of the driveway. Ms_ Decker noted that the "hold harmless" clause was part of the State's requirements. Ms_ Nerland advised that State law pre-empted the City in this regard, stating that HOAs niay not prohibit this use; however, if the Homeowners Association WHOA) requests to be named as an additional insured, that may be done. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES July 13, 2005 Page 5 of 15