Laserfiche WebLink
operating hours. (California Health & Safety Code, section 1507.46, large family <br /> day care homos) <br /> <br /> Historically, the ¢igt of Redwood Cit~ ha, §ranted comparable <br /> permits/uses in $imilar ra$idential zoning districts and these approYed <br /> uses haY, been determined not to adYersely affect ad]dining residences <br /> and not to ba detrimental to the health, sar.tit, and welfare of the <br /> neighborhood. Furthermore, noise generated by tho large family day care <br /> home i$ not expected to exceed or $ignificantllt alter tho ambient noise <br /> IoYels typicalllt associated with residential areas during the time that tho <br /> dalt care is in operation. If it i$ established that any of the patrons of the <br /> largo family day care cause a nuisance, as determined blt the CRlt, than this <br /> permit malt be r~¥oked. Ro¥ocafion would require publi¢ heartng$ bolero <br /> tho Zoning Administrator and City Council. <br /> <br /> 8. Proof of notification of all property owners and/or occupants within 100 feet of tho <br /> subioct property shall bo pro¥idod. (local guidelines). <br /> <br /> Tho applicant has notified all property owners and/or occupants within 100 <br /> foot of the subject property and has submitted proof of notifioafion as part <br /> of her application. <br /> <br />Staff has determined that the application complies with the eight criteria for evaluation. <br />The applicant has agreed to comply with these criteria. Additionally, the parents who <br />currently patronize this family day care home have boon reminded, by the applicant, to <br />be "considerate" when picking-up and dropping-off their children. <br /> <br />Conclusion <br />In summary, the appellants' underlying issue is that cul-de-sacs are different than <br />through streets and/or thoroughfares and should be given special consideration. During <br />the public hearing staff made the observation that most of the issues that were raised <br />appeared to relate to cul-de-sacs and that the appellants felt that the cul-de-sac was <br />inhererltly incompatible with the proposed large family day care home expansion. It <br />would be precedent setting to disallow a large family day care home primarily because it <br />is on a cul-de-sac. <br /> <br />Staff made the determination that the proposed large family day care satisfied the eight <br />evaluation criteria established by the State for review of such facilities. Therefore, the <br />City Council should uphold the decision of the Zoning Administrator <br /> <br /> <br />