Laserfiche WebLink
David H. Wolfskill recalled his involvement in a dispute with a family daycare <br />home operator regarding the operator's use of Mr. Wolfskill's front yard in <br />furtherance of operation of the family day care from January 1996 through <br />December 1997. He stated that the ccndition was alleviated after spending two <br />years and over 585,000.00. He strongly encouraged Council to select the sole <br />option provided by the State that provides the slightest notification of a subset of <br />potentially affected neighbors, Option #3. He stated that he would support a less <br />onerous option if it preserved the right of potentially affected neighbors' <br />notification. <br />Veronica Glaser, a large day care family provider in Redwood City, stated she was <br />present to support the child care providers. She described her history as a child <br />care provider for three years and that she has a nice working relationship with her <br />neighbors, the neighbors enjoy the children, there are elderly people who live <br />nearby and there is a retirement home from which residents walk by and enjoy the <br />children. She stated that there is harmony in the neighborhood and that traffic is <br />not an issue in that drop off occurs at various times in the morning and pick -up <br />begins at 4:00. She encouraged working together and communicating. <br />Lillian Clark stated that she was a parent affected by the lack of child care 8 years <br />ago and had two weeks to place 70 children in the city and there were no slots <br />available. She stated that parents with school age children can be accommodated <br />at large day care centers and that it should be less restricted. <br />Nita Spangler stated that the problem is the cul -de -sac is poorly designed with a <br />tight fit that enters out to Alameda de las Pulgas making it difficult to get in and out <br />of when school lets out. She stated that it is not a very good place for people to <br />deliver and pick -up small children and that the people should be involved in the <br />decision. <br />Rudy Luca agreed with Option #3 so that the people have a right to a hearing to <br />express views on why they do or do not approve. Whether there are restrictions or <br />not, the problem exists because the right option is not in place. There are <br />problems to be considered and the only way to approach that is to have a hearing. <br />Shannon Lee Collins, a family child care provider, stated that it is difficult to get <br />people to come out and make a stand when something works. She stated that <br />young families depend on it and love coming to a home based center in their <br />community. It is a misperception that these are large centers and she stated that <br />there is a limit on the growth and most providers do not care for the maximum of <br />14 children due to scheduling and other considerations. She urged that Option #1 <br />is the best and Option #2 would be the next best alternative. <br />Lori de Martini stated that she is a day care provider in Belmont where there are <br />conditional use permits, therefore, there are very few child care spots available <br />and she often times needs to refer clients outside of the Belmont area. She stated <br />REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING AUGUST 25, 200 <br />MINUTES PAGE 9 <br />