CCMIN010609 - Laserfiche WebLink

Councilmember Sullivan confirmed with Mr. Dolan that the application was approved by the Planning Commission with a modification to allow a short window in advance of the ultimate operation whereby Mr. Pfund could operate without the childcare license up to June 30, 2009. This would be deemed a temporary recreation facility, limiting students to 16 hours per week. Mr. Dolan referred to conditions of approval and noted that the exemption can cover two areas, by a limitation of 16 hours per week, or limiting the program to 12 week intervals. Therefore, the last paragraph in Condition 4, page 1 of Exhibit B should read, "Until such time that a day care license is obtained, no child age 12 years and under can participate at the facility for more than 16 hours per week." The rest of the sentence should be deleted. Councilmember McGovern referred to the Planning Commission meeting, and confirmed that Commissioners thought Mr. Pfund should have a childcare license and voted 4-1 to allow the temporary period. She said staff has recommended all along that this is not a recreation facility but a childcare facility and she believes this is what ultimately needs to be in place. She voiced concern that staff would recommend allowing the temporary facility to operate without provision for a completed background check and childcare license which sets a negative precedence for childcare in the City. City Manager Fialho said staff's recommendation reflects the Planning Commission's recommendation to allow Mr. Pfund to operate temporarily as a recreational use until such time that he receives a license. As an option, the Council could modify this to be reflective of what the original recommendation to Mr. Pfund was six months ago which was, upon receipt of the license, approval can be granted for operating a childcare center at the location. Mayor Hosterman said the Council could approve the land use but not allow Mr. Pfund to operate at all due to the facility being a childcare facility and not a recreational facility, which she confirmed was option 2 in the staff report. Councilmember Cook-Kallio referred to the fire department's sign off and questioned whether or not the facility was inspected for use as a recreation facility. Mr. Dolan said there has not been a final sign off from the fire department, but there was dialogue about what would need to be done to resolve fire and building code issues. The building is sprinklered, there are a number of ways to reach the "E" occupancy type and there needs to be communications between the applicant, architect and building inspector about how the issues will be addressed. However, staff believes there is an inexpensive way for the matter to be addressed. City Manager Fialho said the typical process is that the Council reviews the land use approval at the policy level, upon the tenant improvements being accomplished, building and fire inspections are conducted and then the occupancy certificate is provided to the tenant. George Thomas, Building Official, said he has had discussions with the Fire Marshal on the E occupancy use and there are provisions in the Code that would allow an E occupancy. The building is not a sprinklered building and the use is approximately 2600 in a 9,800 square foot building, so effectively, the alterations were fairly minor. Councilmember McGovern said she read the E occupancy report several times. The first report indicates that there needs to be a two-tier fire wall, which the building does not have. Mr. Thomas said one approach would be anon-separated, mixed use occupancy which would eliminate the requirement for the fire wall. If not, it would be a 2-hour wall. He said all four suites, or the entire building 9800 square foot building is evaluated, and would need to have all City Council Minutes Page 4 of 9 January 6, 2009