CC Min 1997-05-19 - Laserfiche WebLink

Browse Search

" ' - Canyon Road. He said the traffic at the day care center was one or two cars at a time, twenty or thirty minutes in between cars, and he did not believe traffic from the day care had an adverse effect on traffic in general. - Susan Keely, 766 Canyon Road, said this issue has become a "good neighbor" issue. Mrs. Keely described her two day care centers and said how good operators go out of their way to treat their businesses as a privilege with great sensitivity to the neighbors, especially having a commercial business in a neighborhood of family homes. Mrs. Keely said a condition of a day care permit is that parking must be provided for their employees. She said in this case the two employees park on the street. Mrs. Keely asked that the City treat each request for a license or permit individually to avoid causing problems in neighborhoods. She suggested that the City take a look at the steep driveway that is almost unusable. She said that she and the rest of the neighbors did not have a problem with this day care operation. Mayor Hartnett said there were no more speaker cards. 4. Close public hearing: MIS: RUSKINILEIPZIG TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. CARRIED BY UNANIMOUS VOICE VOTE AND THE HEARING ADJOURNED AT 11:26 P.M. MINUTE ORDER NO. 97-111 5. Council action: '-- In response to Council questions regarding the easement, City Attorney Schricker said, "It is not a public easement. It is a private easement with use, pertinent in legal terms, to the property of 743 Canyon Road where the day care center is operated. It benefits that property for access, ingress and egress to that property. It is a burden on the Wolfskill property, legally, but it is a private easement for the benefit of the 743 property. As far as liability is concerned, the easernent itself will not answer the question of liability. It is the matter of usage as to whether or not there is going to be any liability and to whom it would accrue. By way of example, if someone negligently used that easement and caused harm to someone, it is the person who was negligent who would be liable... (It) is a matter of private liability, and does not involve the City. It is not a public easement, it is a private easement, and you'd have to look at the facts with respect to the usage as to whether or not there is any liability. I think it is reasonable to conclude that as the owner of the underlying property of the easement, there may be some concem as to how it is used, but whether that concern would actually rise to liability, narrowly the law would require that there have been some involvement of the property owner to create that liability (the property owner on which the easement crosses.)... If you find that the facts justify the imposition of a condition which would ameliorate some of the adverse activities, if you find that, yes you can attach some use permit conditions." - REGULAR COUNCIL MEETING MINUTE BOOK NO. 55 MAY 19, 1997 MINUTES Page No. 355 PAGE 27