03 ATTACHMENTS - Laserfiche WebLink

DRAFT Commissioner Fox expressed concern about the facility regardless of how many hours it would operate. She stated that common sense dictates that a childcare facility should not be operated in a warehouse district with loading dock doors. She noted that over the last six years since she has been on the Commission, an architect comes forth with plans and applications for a building similar to the one moved from Linwood to the Hacienda Business Park, and that facility plans upgrade to a Class E facility. She stated that this is not a situation where the applicant is trying to come in and not be licensed yet continues to advertise on Craig's List as a childcare facility while talking about being a private recreation facility. She noted that Pleasanton prides itself of quality childcare facilities, and if the Commission starts waiving State requirements that are minimum requirements, such as the 75 square feet per outdoor place per child, this would no longer be ahigh-quality childcare facility. She indicated that she would not support a childcare facility in an attached warehouse space with a loading dock door as a substitute for an outdoor space in an industrial area. She noted that she has a problem with the co-located uses, with it not being safe with other industrial uses in the proximity, as opposed to the Quarry Lane school, which is within that area but is a detached building and self contained. She added that she would not support the area for a childcare facility because once this is approved as a conditional use permit, it would be perpetual, and she did not believe it was an appropriate place for it. In terms of the mesh open loading dock door, Commissioner Fox stated that she did not agree that it is safe and could not find the safety finding. She added that she was not interested in a temporary use either but that she would be interested in seeing the application brought back when the final license is granted at an appropriate location. Commissioner Olson stated that he certainly hopes that one of the remarks made by a public speaker referring to this as a witch hunt make it into the minutes. He noted that he would not use that language but that when he saw the package on his front porch, the word "vendetta" came to mind. He stated that the Commission at this point has the responsibility to the applicant to try and reach some middle ground and do something on a temporary basis as he tried to describe it. Commissioner Olson indicated that one of the strong reasons he states this is that no one has come to any of these meetings with a negative input, including from parents who have had children in this program. He noted that all the testimony being positive says a great deal about the applicant. Commissioner Olson indicated that he will support the project with certain conditions. He expressed agreement with the suggested six-month period. He stated that he thinks the E building discussion is a subterfuge and a way to delay that project further and that he was not in favor of that. He stated that he thinks what the City has presented tonight is a way to deal with this on a basis that would be acceptable to the applicant and at a reasonable cost to him, going back to Condition No. 17 that basically has a Fire Marshal to rule on it. Commissioner Olson agreed that Condition No. 13 regarding a trash enclosure would need to be modified and that the matter of signage has already been discussed. ~~~.-.~ ~ ~~~,~nr i a. ruirvrvirv~, GVMMI551UN MINUTES, 11/12/2008 Page 16 of 25