Laserfiche WebLink
Commissioner Narum suggested that the Planning Commission bring the applicant up <br />since additional conditions had been added. <br />Commissioner Narum moved to re-open the public hearing. <br />Commissioner Olson seconded the motion. <br />ROLL CALL VOTE: <br />AYES: Commissioners Blank, Fox, Narum, Olson, and Pearce. <br />NOES: None. <br />ABSTAIN: None. <br />RECUSED: None. <br />ABSENT: None. <br />The motion passed. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS RE-OPENED. <br />Mr. Nguyen noted that they had addressed many of the issues brought up by the Planning <br />Commission and added that they used the current layout because of the lighting and <br />safety issue as well as the loading docks. He displayed the site layout and noted that the <br />lobby was well lit. He noted that their strict policies included having the supervising <br />adult bring the child into their lobby and fill out the waivers; a matching colored <br />"` wristband would be put on both the child and the supervising adult for identification, and <br />two managers would gather all the children and take them to the party room. When the <br />party is completed, the manager would bring the children to the front and would be <br />required to stay with the group until the supervising adult arrives to pick up the child. He <br />noted that the adult who signed the waiver must pick the child up, and their wristbands <br />would be matched. He added that their guidelines were stricter than usual He noted that <br />if the supervising adult chose to stay, they could park in the back. He displayed the <br />lighting along the walkway for safety <br />In response to an inquiry by Chairperson Fox regarding whether the lobby could be <br />placed in the back, Mr. Nguyen replied that would require more workmen and that they <br />must get the concurrence of the building owners. He added that they would also have to <br />work with Club Sport to make that change. <br />Ms. Nguyen noted that they preferred to have the lobby in the front area. He explained <br />that there was a storage facility on the second floor in the front area, and they would have <br />to knock down this second level to put a bounce area on that side of the building. From a <br />financial point of view, they preferred to have the lobby in the front. They proposed to <br />the landlord that there be a handicapped drop-off area in the front. <br />THE PUBLIC HEARING WAS CLOSED. <br />PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES October 24, 2007 Page 13 of 40 <br />