AgdaPkt 2003-06-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

8-A-37 away the non - discretionary permit, if there were some health or safety violation of major _ proportions. Commissioner Paulson wanted to know where it goes from here, if the Commission does or does not make an approval. (rvi Passanisi pointed out they would be making a "recommendation ", not approval). She said, "Does it go to Council and it is Council's ultimate decision ?" Mr. Passanisi said that was correct. He said the Council will either confirm or decide to change it. Commissioner Garcia wanted to know if he was correct in understanding that in Option 2, the applicant had to notify the neighbors, that there was no Public Hearing involved? Mr. Passanisi said the City Council, on February 14, 2000, actually approved an Ordinance which stated that the applicant of a Large Family Day Care home would have to notify the surrounding property owners. There is no Public Hearing involved with it. Commissioner Garcia wanted to know, "What is the point of mailing a notification to a neighbor when there is absolutely nothing they could say about it ?" Mr. Passanisi said that is why they are recommending Option 2, where there would not be any notification. Commissioner Garcia said he could not agree with that logic of not notifying the neighbors. He said that personally on this issue, he is going back to when they voted on Plan B versus Plan 3. He thinks the neighbors are entitled to be notified, if all of a sudden they are going to have something that involves 7 -12, or 14 children in their neighborhood. Commissioner Piulle referred to the red -lined report of 4/8/03 — Section 39.3B -7. She asked to explain to her why the following language was removed ... "the facilities shall be operated in a manner which will not adversely affect adjoining residences, and not be detrimental to the health, safety, and welfare of the neighborhood." Mr. Brower said the State law does not provide for that under Option 2. Because of that, the language could not remain in the Ordinance. Commissioner Piulle questioned if it was not a discretionary item that the City could adopt to put in the Ordinance. Mr. Williams said that there was a lot of discretion associated with that phrase. He said it leaves it up to a lot of individual judgment, looking as the particulars of the case, as opposed to having a set list of criteria. (e.g., if it were identified more specifically, and included more conditions that were more quantitative or specific for staff members to review and respond to.) But this phrase was so vague and general that it really did not fit as a non - discretionary type of criteria. He said if you would like to have that type of criteria, it certainly fits within a Use Permit approach; or Option 3 type criteria, which the State law allows. Commissioner Piulle said she was all for day care, but she thinks the neighbors need some kind of assurances that they can appeal under certain circumstances. She wanted to know what the recourse would be for neighbors. She also felt it was no use notifying Page 15 of 26