18 ATTACHMENT 05 - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT the program and learn martial arts. He noted that he had studied martial arts for over 30 years, and that he would continue to do so for the rest of his life. He would like to continue his instruction activities in his current location. He noted that he did not provide care and supervision to the children; nor did the swim centers, gymnastics centers, or dance studios. He believed the City policy was to create a waiver, which he already had. He would be happy to sign a condition stating that he would retain the waiver and would have the parents escort their children out of the facility. He noted that he would be happy to work with the City in order to make the business work. THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. Commissioner Fox noted that with respect to the waiver from licensure, the manual read, "Once at the facility, children are not assigned specific activities or placed in a structured program" and "Children participating in the recreational program are not there to receive structured care and supervision." She added that it further discussed children being able to arrive or depart from the facility on their own. She noted that the staff report discussed the schedule and that after arrival, there was time for lunch, martial arts from 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m., followed by a half-hour break. Following the break, there was leadership, agility, and balance training from 2:30 p.m. to 3:30 p.m., then martial arts games and activities from 5:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.; and quiet activities from 5:30 p.m. to 6:15 p.m. until pickup. She noted that the website talked about structured games and activities. Based upon the licensing manual and the applicant's description, Commissioner Fox inquired whether the children were in a structured program. Mr. Roush replied that as indicated in the staff report, staff had not agreed with the State's determination that the Tri- Valley Martial Arts Academy would fall within the exemption. Staff indicated the rules for the protection of children as well as the schedule and activities set forth for the children would remove the use from the exemption. Commissioner Fox noted that the testimony indicated that the waiver allowed children to come and go as they pleased, although it was not the parents' or applicant's experience that it would happen. She inquired whether that would invalidate the waiver. Mr. Roush did not know whether it would invalidate the waiver per se, but staff believed that the waiver notwithstanding, the children were not really free to come and go and that they were kept there until the parents arrived. It was staff's opinion that while the waiver may be valid, it did not reflect reality. In response to an inquiry by Commissioner Fox regarding whether there would be potentially 21 cars at the facility in the morning during the summer months, Ms. Amos replied that in that case, the same parking requirements would apply as for the adult classes, which was one space for every two students in attendance. The applicant stated that the parents generally staggered their arrivals. Commissioner Pearce noted that the applicant had called similar facilities to inquire about their care and supervision policies and inquired whether the number of hours per week the children attended the facility had been determined. She wished to understand the difference in the restrictions between a gymnastic studio and this use, when an exemption for care and supervision would be required, and when it would not be required. DRAFT EXCERPTS: PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, 2-13-2008 Page 11 of 15