AgdaPkt 2003-06-23 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

B.A-51 1. applicants of large .day rare homes to notify surrounding property owners, but 2. did not require a public hearing; and 3. did not require a filing fee. Unfortunately, after the Council adopted the "Ordinance," a different version was printed and circulated, and in fact ended up on the City's website. This version — which was never introduced or adopted by the City Council — required in relevant part: 1. the City's Zoning Administrator to give notice to neighbors and 2. allow the neighbors or the applicant to have a hearing before the Zoning Administrator. The different versions arose from the fact that the "Ordinance" actually adopted by the City Council was the version favored by the City's staff. It maintained the then existing "non- discretionary" permit process which originated in 1991. The ordinance which was not adopted, was a version based upon the recommendation of the City's Planning Commission and a City Council Subcommittee. In their view, the desire was to have applicants proceed by way of a conditional use process, which would then obligate the Zoning Administrator to give notice and hold a hearing. Then, the Zoning Administrator would exercise his /her discretion in either granting or denying the family day care permit During a recent appeal of an approval for a large day care home to the City Council, staff determined that the newly amended and adopted Ordinance was not in compliance with State law and did not reflect the original intent of the City Council. Based upon an opinion of the City Attorney, these published provisions were found to be inconsistent and more restrictive than State law, and did not follow the intended non - discretionary permit process. For this reason staff is now proposing to modify the Ordinance. The fifth set of amendments is intended to revise the City's criteria for child day care facilities to align the Zoning Ordinance with State law and to minimize discretionary review and public hearings for family day care homes. In particular, State law allows cities to provide for "large family day care homes" in residential zones either as a) permitted uses, b) permitted uses subject to review of and compliance with specific criteria for location, parking, licensing, and public safety, etc., or c) uses subject to limited public notice and hearing. The City's ordinance intends to follow approach (b) but as stated above now prescribes approach (c) instead. The revisions also provide an opportunity to better organize the child day care provisions, and a new Article 39 is proposed to accommodate the basic standards and review process for such facilities. I3