AgdaPkt 2003-08-25 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

% • • Under this provision, there would be no public hearing before the Zoning Administrator or a filing fee. The basis for approval of the permit would be a set of criteria that provided little room for discretion by the City. Essentially the City Council adopted a "hybrid" process of Options 2 and 3. As a result of this decision, staff prepared a courtesy notice to be included in the application package. (See Attachment #2) Unfortunately, after adoption of the ordinance, a different version was published and was noted on the City's web site and in the printed copy of the Zoning Ordinance. This incorrect version indicates that the City, rather than the applicant, should provide notice to the neighbors and that a hearing may be requested before the Zoning Administrator. This mistake was discovered during the consideration of an appeal for a large family childcare on Maxwell Lane and also was the subject of a grand jury inquiry. For a more detailed history of the events please review the attached chronology. (Attachment #3) On May 31, 2002, the City Attorney issued an opinion that the ordinance which was actually approved by City Council in February 2000 overstepped the limits of State law, and the City Attorney determined that in his review of the administrative record of the February, 14, 2000, meeting it was "clear that a non - discretionary permit process was the alternative of choice of the City Council and duly adopted" (See Attachment #4: Memo dated May 31, 2002, from City Attorney). Thus the City Council had no basis to review the subject appeal, and the Zoning Administrator's decision to approve the large family childcare on Maxwell Lane stood. In order to clean up the uncertainty over the interpretation of the current regulations for large family childcare homes and inconsistencies with State law, staff drafted a revised ordinance providing for a "nondiscretionary" review process (Option 2) for large family childcare homes. This ordinance was consistent with the City Council's previous action and was presented to the Planning Commission. Planning Commission Review On May 6, 2003, the Planning Commission approved a Resolution of Intention to initiate the consideration of staff proposed amendments to the childcare provisions of the Zoning Ordinance 2 . The key provisions of staffs proposed amendment included the following: Updated definitions of "child care facility," "child care center," "child care home," and "family child care home" (small and large) to provide consistency with State regulations and to distinguish child day care from other kinds of day care (such as adult day care) that are common today. A new Article 39 for Child Care Facilities, to outline the basic criteria and review processes for childcare centers and family childcare homes. These standards are relocated from the Definitions Section, which should not include development standards and the review process, to the new Article. ` The Minutes of the May 6, 2003 Planning Commission meeting where this was discussed are included as Attachment 5 to this report