PC 021308 - Laserfiche WebLink

Commissioner Olson referred to his previous question regarding the definition of "school age" and although Grades K through 12 at the upper ages may not require care and supervision, Grades K through something does. He suggested that the way to solve the problem would be to get a license. Commissioner Olson indicated he would support the motion. Commissioner Narum noted that she could not make Finding No. 2 and could make Finding No. 1 with respect to the parking. She was uncomfortable with the motion on the floor and understood that the denial was based on the inability to make any of the findings. Commissioner Fox noted that she supported the motion with respect to parking because of the classification of the facility in Dublin according to the materials in the staff report. She noted that it had been classified as a community facility use in Dublin as well as an indoor recreational facility use. She noted that as an indoor recreational center, the parking ordinance states that one parking space would be required for every 50 square feet inside the building, which would require 67 parking spaces; that was further reduced to 45 parking spaces. She would prefer to support staff s findings and then discover the true classification. She noted that it may be classified as a child-care center during the day and an recreational facility at night and during the summer or some combination. Chair Blank noted that he was very familiar with the neighborhood because his son attended Quarry Lane School. He did not believe there was a parking issue at all. He believed that with respect to the "free to come and go" issue, the children could not be physically restrained. As a parent, he typically felt comfortable leaving his child at an instructional facility once he had checked the site. He believed that too much had been made of that issue and noted that even on closed-campus high schools, the students were free to come and go, regardless of consequences. He believed the Planning Commission could vote to deny or could vote to approve with conditions that would make the conditional use permit satisfactory to the Commission, such as licensing or other procedures. He noted that the Commission had heard a considerable amount of compassionate and heartfelt testimony and had no doubt that Mr. Pfund ran an excellent program. He indicated he agreed with Commissioner Olson regarding requiring licensing. He suggested that whether the applicant believed his facility was a daycare or not, it may be best to obtain a daycare license or to comply with the requirements of a daycare facility. He believed that would remove any question with respect to staff's expectations. He noted that if the Commission denied this application, the applicant would have to start at square one. Mr. Roush noted that may be construed as imposing a business plan on the applicant that he may not want to pursue. Chair Blank understood the concern and added that it would be the applicant's choice whether or not to comply with the conditions to obtain the conditional use permit. PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES, February 13, 2008 Page 34 of 42