PC 021308 - Laserfiche WebLink

sign-in/sign-out sheets. Staff believed that the children would be at this particular facility longer than those hours and would not meet the exemption. In other use permits, if it is over those hours, staff requires that these uses meet the State requirements to obtain a daycare license. Chair Blank noted that there had been considerable discussion about daycare and its licensing and inquired about the cost and other burdens required to acquire a daycare license. Ms. Amos replied that staff typically did not ask those types of questions since the fiscal impacts were not considered in these matters. She noted that the PUD required a conditional use permit for recreational facilities and daycare facilities. Commissioner Fox asked, since staff believes that the use requires a childcare license, whether the facility would be required to conform to the Municipal Code requirements and zoning requirements for a childcare center. Ms. Amos noted that he PUD required a conditional use permit for recreational facilities and daycare facilities. Chair Blank asked if the rest of the Commission had other questions. Commissioner O'Connor indicated the questions he was going to ask have already been addresses. Commissioner Fox agreed with Mr. Roush that this use did not follow the exemption criteria as a drop-in facility because of the issue with the waiver. She believed that in order for the use to qualify for the exemption, it must truly reflect reality that the drop-in requirements meant that the children may be free to come and go as they please. She believed this use required licensing in accordance with Health and Safety Code 1596.792 and 1596.793. Commissioner Fox moved to deny PCUP-200, based on the inability to make any of the conditional use permit findings. Commissioner Pearce seconded the motion. Commissioner Pearce noted that she had no doubt that Mr. Pfund was a good teacher and that the program taught positive skills. She could not make Finding No. 2 with respect to the current business plan and could not find that it was not detrimental to the public health, safety, and welfare because having the children free to come and go as they please was incompatible with the City's sign-in/sign-out policy. She noted that the applicant could continue to state that he did not provide care and supervision, but under the reading of the licensing requirements, since he provided structured activities, rules, instruction, he provides care and supervision, and a waiver did not repudiate that. She stated that she would like to see this business succeed and hoped that modifications could be made to the business plan. She noted that she could not support it with the way it was currently structured. Commissioner Olson noted that he had no doubt that this was a great program but had problems reconciling the statement that there was no care and supervision and the fact that the applicant picks the children up at school. He believed that at the kindergarten level, there should be supervision and care while they are in the applicant's presence. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 33 of 42