HomeMy WebLinkAboutCD 23 Baypoint; Day Care FacilityCITY OF Agenda Item No. 3.b
Meeting Date: June 3, 2013
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT
Department: Community Development
Prepared b ?AfF7 &° SOC- City Manager Approval-,J
aul A. Jensen (CP)
SUBJECT: 23 Baypoint Drive — Appeal of the Planning Commission's decision to grant an appeal
(AP12-007) and overturn the Zoning Administrator's conditional approval of Use Permit (UP12-022) to
allow the operation of a licensed large family day care (9-14 children maximum) in a two-story single
family townhome; APN: 009-362-20; Planned Development (PD1562) Zoning District; Amanda McCarthy,
appellant; Leticia Arvizu/Maria Ramirez, applicant; Heather Ludloff, owner; File No.: AP13-001.
RECOMMENDATION: Based on the direction of the Council from their May 20, 2013 meeting, it is
recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution, granting the appeal (AP13-001) and
overturning the Planning Commission's February 26, 2013 decision to overturn the Zoning Administrator's
approval of a Use Permit by adopting the attached Resolution (Attachment 1). The recommended action
would result in the approval of the Use Permit for a large family day care.
BACKGROUND: On May 20, 2013, the City Council conducted a public hearing on the appeal (AP13-
001) of the Planning Commission's February 26, 2013 decision to overturn the Zoning Administrator's
approval of a Large Family Day Care (9-14 children) at 23 Baypoint Drive. The Council unanimously
voted to grant the appeal of Amanda McCarthy (Motion by Councilmember McCullough, second by
Councilmember Connolly). Video proceedings from this hearing can be viewed at
www.citvofsanrafael.org/meetings, by clicking on the May 20, 2013 City Council agenda item. However,
since the Draft Resolution before the Council at that meeting reflected denial of the appeal, the Council
directed staff to prepare a revised Resolution for granting the appeal. The revised Resolution is attached.
The revised resolution includes the following:
• Updates the resolution to grant the appeal, rather than deny the appeal as previously
recommended by the Commission.
• The "response and findings" to appeal points 1 through 4 have been updated to reflect the
Council's comments and direction as expressed during the May 20, 2013 hearing (see
Resolution Attachment 1, Pages 3-5 of this report).
• Staff has also updated the original Zoning Administrator Use Permit findings for approval with
additional language as put forth by the Council during their discussion of the project (See
Resolution - Attachment 1, Pages 5-7 of this report).
• As directed by the Council, the revised resolution also contains three additional Conditions of
Approval (COA), including COA #2 (Attachment 1, Page 7 of this report), limiting the Use
Permit to 6 months, COA # 3 (Attachment 1, Page 7 of this report) delineating the procedure
for all interested parties to meet and confer about potential impacts, including that staff will
initiate the first meeting, and COA #4 (Attachment 1, Page 8 of this report), which delineates
FOR CITY CLERK ONLY
File No.:
Council Meeting:
Disposition:t�� /
SAN RAFAEL CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT / Page: 2
the protocol for Planning staffs 6 month review of the Use Permit.
• The matter has been brought forward as a consent item.
OPTIONS: The City Council has the following options:
1. Grant the appeal and overturn the Planning Commission's decision with further modifications,
changes or additional conditions of approval to the original Zoning Administrator conditions of
approval or the new conditions of approval directed by the Council at their May 20, 2013 meeting.
2. Continue the appeal to allow the applicant, appellant(s) or staff to address any comments or concerns
of the Council.
ACTION REQUIRED: It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolution granting the
Appeal (AP13-001) and overturning the Planning Commission's decision to overturn the Zoning
Administrator's approval of a Use Permit (UP12-022) for a large family day care home use at 23 Baypoint
Drive (Attachment 1).
ATTACHMENTS: Page No.
1. Draft Resolution Granting Appeal and Overturning Planning Commission's 2/26/13 Decision 3
RESOLUTION NO. 13539
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN RAFAEL UPHOLDING AN
APPEAL (AP13-001) AND OVERTURNING THE FEBRUARY 26, 2013 PLANNING
COMMISSION DECISION TO GRANT AN APPEAL (AP12-007) AND OVERTURN THE
ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT (UP12-022)
ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF A LICENSED LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE (9-14
CHILDREN MAXIMUM) IN A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY TOWNHOME;
THEREFORE, THE USE PERMIT FOR A LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE AT 23
BAYPOINT DRIVE STANDS AS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS (APN: 009-362-20)
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN RAFAEL RESOLVES as follows:
WHEREAS, on July 9, 2012, Maria Ramirez, operator of Ramirez Day Care, and her
daughter, Leticia Arviz_u (acting as the project applicant) submitted a Use Permit application (UP 12-
022) to operate a licensed large family day care for 9-14 children in the two-story single family
townhome at 23 Baypoint Drive; and
WHEREAS, the proposed large family day care home was proposed to operate between
the hours of 6:00 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Use Permit application was reviewed by the Land
Development, Traffic Engineering, Fire Prevention and Building Divisions of the City of San
Rafael and was recommended for approval subject to conditions; and
WHEREAS, upon review of the application, the project was determined to be exempt from
the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15301 (Existing Facilities); and
WHEREAS, the application was deemed complete for processing on August 9, 2012; and
WHEREAS, on October 28, 2012, the Zoning Administrator (ZA) held a duly noticed
public hearing on the proposed Use Permit, accepting all oral and written public testimony. Six
members of the public were present at the hearing, raising a number of concerns and issues about
the proposed day care use; and
WHEREAS, following the closure of the public hearing, the ZA continued the matter to
November 14, 2012 to allow neighbors an opportunity to visit the daycare and talk with the
applicant; and
WHEREAS, on November 14, 2012, the Zoning Administrator conducted the continued
public hearing, accepting all oral and written public testimony. At the end of the hearing, the ZA
conditionally approved the Use Permit (UP12-022) allowing the operation of a licensed large
family day care for 9-14 children in the two-story single family townhome at 23 Baypoint Drive,
finding that the proposed project was consistent with all Performance Standards pursuant to
Zoning Ordinance Section 14.17.040 (Performance Standards, Family Day Care Home, Large);
and
WHEREAS, notice of this decision, including transmittal of the meeting minutes and
findings and conditions of approval were mailed and/or e-mailed to the applicant, the property
owner, and all residents in attendance at the Zoning Administrator hearing; and
WHEREAS, on November 21, 2012, Victoria Pollick (adjacent resident at 27 Baypoint
Drive), filed a timely appeal (AP 12-007) of the Zoning Administrator's conditional approval of Use
Permit UP] 2-022, pursuant to Chapter 28 (Appeals) of the City's Zoning Ordinance, citing: 1) noise
issues were not fully addressed; 2) noise and vibration are a problem because 23 Baypoint Drive
and 27 Baypoint Drive share a common wall; 3) questions the applicant's ability to adhere to use
permit conditions of approval because the current childcare is already operating with 9 children,
which exceeds the limit allowed without an approved use permit; and 4) whether the operation has
approval of the City of San Rafael Fire Department; and;
WHEREAS, the project was scheduled and placed on the agenda for the January 29, 2013
Planning Commission meeting and at the time of the hearing, there were only 4 Commissioners in
attendance (Commissioners Lubamersky, Paul, Schaefer and Robertson); and
WHEREAS, Commissioner Schaefer recused himself from this item due to potential
conflict of interest, leaving 3 Commissioners. This did not constitute a quorum and therefore the
item could not be heard and the appeal was automatically continued to the next available Planning
Commission meeting date (February 12, 2013); and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2013, the San Rafael Planning Commission held a duly -
noticed public hearing to consider the Appeal (AP 12-007), accepted and considered all oral and
written public testimony and the written report of Community Development Department staff and
closed said hearing on that date; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2013, the majority of the Commission found that the appeal
did have merit and the Commission was inclined to grant the appeal, thus overturning the Zoning
Administrator's approval. However, given that the Draft Resolution before the Commission did not
reflect their intention, the Commission could not take formal action that evening; and
WHEREAS, on February 12, 2013, Commissioner Lubamersky moved and Commissioner
Wise seconded to direct staff to prepare a revised Resolution granting the appeal and overrunning
the ZA's approval and return to their next scheduled meeting. This motion was approved 5-0-1
(with Commissioner Schaeffer abstaining due to potential conflict of interest); and
WHEREAS, on February 26, 2013, the Planning Commission considered the revised
Resolution with findings for the granting of the appeal and overturning the Zoning Administrator's
approval of the Use Pen -nit. Following closure of the public hearing, the Planning Commission
granted the appeal and overturned the Zoning Administator approval of Use Pen -nit (UP12-022).
Commissioner Robertson moved and Comissioner Lubarmersy seconded to adopt Resolution 13-
03, granting the appeal and overturning the Zoning Administrator's approval. This motion carried
by a vote of 5-0-2 (with Commissioner Belleto recusing himself since he was not appointed to the
Commission at the February 12`x' meeting and Commssioner Schaefer abstaining due to potential
conflict of interest), based on Findings that the proposed project would create too much noise for
adjacent neighbors due to the shared common wall townhome design and the cul-de-sac parking
arrangement; and
WHEREAS, on March 5, 2013, within the statutory 5 day appeal period, Amanda
McCarthy, a resident of San Rafael and parent of a child at the family daycare, filed an appeal
(&913-001) of the Planning Connnismkx/`m uodon` pursuant to the provisions of Sun Rafael
Municipal Code Chapter 14.28, uhinnz four points of appeal and requesting that the City Council
reverse the February 26, 2013 decision of the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, on May 20' 2013, the City Council held u du public hearing to
consider the Appeal (/\9l3 -0O|), accepted and considered all oral and written public testimony and
the written report of the Community Development Department staff and closed said hearing on that
date; and
WHEREAS, following the closure of the public hearing, the City Council discussed the
appeal points and the proposal, ultimately voting unanimously tudirect staff toprepare urevised
Resolution, granting the appeal of the Planning Commission's decision, thereby overturning the
Planning Commission decision to overturn the (AP12-007) Zoning Administrator's approval of Use
Pen -nit UP] 2-O22. The Council further recommended that the approval include ucondition of
approval of the Use Pen -nit (UP12-022) to limit the approval for a period of 6 months, during which
time the daycare provider, concerned residents and Community Action Marin staff will meet and
confer to address resident concerns about noise, privacy and parking. At the end of the 6 month
period, the matter will return toCity staff for review and ifsignificant noise ortraffic issue are
found, the Use Pen -nit may berevoked; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered the revised Resolution to reflect their direction
from the May 20,20l3meeting 0ogrant the appeal and overturn the February 26.2U|3Planning
Commission decision, including the appropriate findings and conditions ofapproval; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, the City Council hereby g,uuie the Appeal
(&P13'001) of Amanda McCarthy and overturns the February 26, 2013 P|unoio& Cuouoniaaiou
decision granting the uppcu| o[the Zoning Administrator's approval of Use Pconit(Uy|2-O22),
thereby granting approval of the Use Pen -nit for a large family day care for 6 months. The City
Council finds that the points of the appeal (identified in bo/dlib,6c0 can be supported for the
fb|>nvving reasons:
"While there isucommon wall adjoining 23 BaypwinrDrive and J7Baypnin/
Drive(adjacent neighbor andprevious appellant, Victoria Pollick),this common wall consists of
privmtefamily space, both upstairs and downstairs. No children are allowed in this area (save
older children, one at a time and supervised to use the restroom). A solid door separates this area
which consists of an open kitchen divided byucounterlharfrom an area with ucouch, loveseat,
and television, or/amily bedrooms . A solid door separates thismreafrom the
This chJdren'xarea is separatedfrom this common wall by approximately 30feetand wclosed
Finding:Response and The Planning Commission's decision was based ontheir review ofthe Z&
minutes, site visits and analysis u[the proposedproject's consistency with applicable General Plan
2U2Opolicies and conformance with Zoning Ordinance regulations. lnaddition, the Commission
heard testimony from the ZA decision appellant (adjacent common wall neighbor at 27 Baypoint)
that noise and vibrations from ucdvkica at the daycare were disruptive. The Commission uhimnuio|y
voted (5-0-2, with Cononuiaaioncm Be||cUo and Schaefer abstaining) tnadopt aresolution granting
the appeal ofthe Zoning Administrator decision and thus overturning the ZA`aapproval. }lovvevcr'
based on City Council review of the appeal on May 20, 2013, including the staff report appeal
letter, infon-nation submitted in cornment letters and public hearing testimony, the Council
ultimately voted unanimously to grant the oppcu| of the Planning Commission decision, with the
caveat that the Use Permit would be valid for 6 months. The Council found that the noise impacts
that the Commission cited as reason for the denial may not be appropriate given the noise readings
presented by the appellant. The Council further voted to allow the day care operator and their
neighbors to meet and confer to address the issues of noise and drop-off/pick-up and thus granted
the Use Permit for a period of 6 months, during which time the daycare provider (Ramirez Family
Daycare), concerned residents, stafffrom Community Action Marin and the Baypoint Lagoon
HOA, will work together to address potential impacts from the daycare regarding noise, privacy and
parking safety. The framework for the discussion will be based on the points identified in a letter
from the appellant (Amanda McCarthy) to the Council dated May 5, 2013, identifying 6 points that
may potentially ameliorate concerns, as listed below:
I . Replace the doors and/or windows of the home to be more "soundless"
2. Installing an A/C system so that the windows do not need to be open when it is hot
3. Conducting a study of "comps" near other "large" home daycares to determine any effect
of home daycares on property value while also engaging a realtor and appraiser/broker to
fully understand any implications for the future sale of your home (my understanding is that
there is no difference between 8 children and 14 children)
4. Requiring a set drop-off and pick-up time "set window" to reduce any perceived impacts of
these activities
5. Requiring a 6 -month or I -year (biannual or annual) renewal of the pen -nit
6. Revocation of the permit if any conditions agreed to by neighbors surface
Appeal Point #2: "The side yard is not and has never been used as a play area. Therefore, the
play area has a 10 foot wide buffer that is not used for play that is adjacent to a neighbor's yard
(19 Baypoint Drive). "
Response and Finding: The Planning Commission determined that the outdoor activities of the
daycare would have a negative impact on the outdoor recreational spaces for the adjacent neighbors
due to the design of the townhomes in the project vicinity (cul-de-sac with small yards), and the
close proximity of the side yard to the outdoor play area for the daycare. However, the Council
determined that while the daycare did introduce a noise element to the neighborhood, there may be
ways to mitigate for the noise such that the impact from the daily daycare operations would be more
acceptable to adjacent residents. To that end, The Council voted unanimously to grant the appeal,
approving a Use Permit for a 6 month time period, during which time, the daycare provider,
concerned residents and staff from Community Action Marin will work together to address
potential impacts from the daycare regarding noise, privacy and parking safety.
Appeal Point #3: "It should be noted that at maximum, should 14 children be present in one day,
an increase of'28 car trips would be documented This would be spaced out over the entire day, as
shown in the typical daily log of the day (Attachment E). Based on the existing neighborhood
use of the roadway, this is not expected to be a significant, not substantial, nor noticeable
increase in traffic. In addition, there is ample street parking such that parents are able to park on
each side of the "driveway" at any time. Parents do not enter the driveway that provides access to
each of the homes, garages, and guest spaces. "
Response and Finding: The Planning Commission determined that the loading and unloading of
potentially 14 children near the small cul-de-sac presented a safety concern for the children because
of limited visibility for vehicle backup in the driveway and potential conflict of vehicles exiting
onto the common driveway in the cul-de- sac. The Council determined that there was an
opportunity for the daycare provider and the residents to work together and resolve potential drop-
off and pick-up concerns. As such, the Council unanimously voted to grant the appeal with the
caveat that the Use Permit be granted for 6 months only and that all parties work together to
consider the suggestions proposed by the appellant and listed in the response to Appeal Point #1
above. The Council has added Condition of Approval #2 to the previously approved conditions,
stipulating that the use permit shall return for Zoning Administrator review after the 6 month time
period has ended.
Appeal Point #4: "In terms of suitability for a large family day care ....for the majority of the
day, no more than seven children are present on the premises. Any additional children up to the
maximum of 14 children include school-age children who are quietly doing homework, reading,
or sleeping (ages typically are 5-12). "
Response and Finding: The Planning Commission determined that the proposed large family
daycare use would be detrimental to properties in the project vicinity, and that small family day care
(0-8 children) was a more appropriate size for the daycare operation on site. However, the Council
recognized the need for large family day care (9-14 children) in San Rafael and the benefit it
provides as a service to the community. The Council heard testimony from adjacent neighbors that
the noise from the daycare was an intrusion on their peace and quiet during the day. However, after
discussing the potential conflicts, the Council felt that the parties may be able to find a solution that
would mitigate the impacts in a way that would allow the daycare to be more compatible with the
neighborhood. Ultimately, the Council voted unanimously to grant the appeal and approve the Use
Permit for 6 months, with the caveat that the parties work together to consider the suggestions
proposed by the appellant (see response to Appeal Point 91 above) as possible conditions of project
approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, based on the Council's action to grant the appeal and
overturn the Planning Commission's decision, the Use Permit stands as conditionally approved for
6 months. The proposed minor interior alterations and operation of a large family day care use at 23
Baypoint Drive are exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
pursuant to Section 15301 a (Existing Facilities) of the CEQA Guidelines; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the time within which to seek judicial review of this
decision is governed by Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.6.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the custodian of documents which constitute the
record of proceedings upon which this decision is based is the Community Development
Department; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council does
hereby grant the appeal and overturn the February 26, 2013 Planning Commission decision granting
an appeal and overturning the November 14, 2012 Zoning Administrator's approval of a Use Permit
(UP12-022)for a large family day care based on the following findings:
USE PEWMIT FINDINGS (UP12-022)
The proposed large family day care use, as conditioned, is in accordance with the City of
San Rafael General Plan 2020, the objectives of Title 14 of the City of San Rafael
Municipal Code (the Zoning Ordinance), and the purposes of the Planned Development
(PD] 562) Zoning District in which the site is located because: 1) the child care service use
is consistent with General Plan Policy NH -11 (needed neighborhood serving uses) and
General Plan Policy NH -52 (encouraging new businesses that provide needed services), 2)
large family day care is a conditionally allowable use in the Planned Development zoning
district; and 3) the proposed large family day care meets the Performance Standards per
Section 14.17.040 of the Zoning Ordinance, including a license from the State of California
(license 4214005252). However, while the Council did find that the proposed project did
meet all performance standards for large family day cares, the Council also found that the
performance standards were lacking a strong framework of objective measures to analyze
project specific impacts. With a better framework in place, the Council felt there may be an
opportunity to minimize the daycare's impact on adjacent properties. As such, the Council
voted that the prudent course of action would be to conditionally approve the proposed Use
Permit for 6 months, during which time the daycare provider and all effected parties shall
coordinate their efforts to try and find ways to mitigate the potential impacts from the
daycare use, as delineated in Finding #2 below.
The proposed large family day care use, as conditioned, would not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, or welfare, or materially injurious to properties or improvements in
the vicinity of 23 Baypoint Drive, or to the general welfare of the City of San Rafael
because: 1) the proposed project is a conditionally allowed use under the zoning code; 2)
the proposed project does not propose any exterior changes to the building or expansion to
the building; 3) the proposed project has been reviewed by appropriate City Departments
and appropriate HOA; and 4) the proposed passenger loading plan was approved by the
Traffic Division. Resident concerns expressed about traffic safety along Baypoint Drive
were not specifically associated with the proposed daycare use, but related to traffic in
general. Parking issues specific to the loading and unloading of children at the site have
been addressed by adding conditions of approval to minimize potential impacts identified
by concerned neighbors, including COA #6, which prohibits parking in the cul-de-sac area
and guest parking spaces, and COA #9 which requires a Use Pen -nit amendment (with a
public notice and hearing) for any future large family day care facility proposed at 23
Baypoint Drive. At the Council hearing, residents raised concerns about noise from the
child care facility, and the Council heard testimony from the appellant that the added noise
was not excessive relative to the amount of time the children will spend outdoors (2
hours/day). In addition, the house at 23 Baypoint Drive faces the street and the outdoor
play area fronts on the street side of Baypoint Drive. This will minimize noise impacts to
the adjacent property at 19 Baypoint and 27 Baypoint because the outdoor play area is not
adjacent to the recreational spaces for these adjacent properties. Ultimately, the Council
voted unanimously to limit the Use Permit for a 6 month period only (Condition of
Approval 42). During this time frame, the daycare provider, concerned residents, staff
from Community Action Marin and the Baypoint Lagoon HOA, will work together to
address potential impacts from the daycare regarding noise, privacy and parking safety. The
framework for the discussion will be based on the points identified in a letter from the
appellant (Amanda McCarthy) to the Council dated May 5, 2013, identifying the following
points that may ameliorate concerns, as listed below:
a) Replace the doors and/or windows of the home to be more "soundless"
b) Installing an AJC system so that the windows do not need to be open when it is hot
c) Conducting a study of "comps" near other "large" home daycares to determine any
effect of home daycares on property value while also engaging a realtor and
appraiser/broker to fully understand any implications for the future sale of your
home (my understanding is that there is no difference between 8 children and 14
children)
d) Requiring a set drop-off and pick-up time "set window" to reduce any perceived
impacts of these activities
e) Requiring a 6 -month or 1 -year (biannual or annual) renewal of the permit
0 Revocation of the permit if any conditions agreed to by neighbors surface.
The proposed child care service (as conditioned) complies with each of the applicable
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance because it has been reviewed by the Zoning
Administrator and found to be a conditionally allowable use in the Planned Development
Zoning District pursuant to Zoning Code Section 14.04.020. Further, the proposed project
would meet the applicable requirements under the Performance Standards for Large Family
Day Care in Section 14.17.040 of the Zoning Ordinance.
USE PERMIT (UP12-022) CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
Planning Division
1. Except as modified by these conditions of approval, this Use Permit (UP12-022) approves a
large family day care facility for up to a maximum of 14 children. Hours of operation for drop
off and pick up shall be between the hours of 6:30 am to 6:00 pm, Monday through Friday.
Outdoor playtime is limited to 1 hour in the morning (generally between 11:00 am — 12:00 pm)
and 1 hour in the afternoon (generally between 1:30 pm — 2:30 pm). Any increase in the hours
of operation or increase in the amount of outdoor playtime would require an amendment to Use
Permit (UP] 2-022).
This Use Permit (UPI2-022)is valid for 6 months only, or until December 3, 2013. At the end
of this 6 month period, the Use Permit shall be reviewed by the Planning Division staff to
review the continued operation of the use and review the progress by the various parties on
implementing measures to address the neighbors' concerns and determine compliance with
conditions of approval, as outlined in Condition of Approval 43 below. Based on the review,
the Use Permit may be extended or not extended subject to the procedures outlined in Condition
of Approval #4 below.
Within the 6 month tirne period, the daycare provider, concerned residents, staff from
Community Action Marin and the Baypoint Lagoon HOA, will meet and confer to address
potential impacts from the daycare regarding noise, privacy and parking safety.
a. City staff will initiate an introductory meeting between the four parties to establish
the framework, explain this condition of approval and encourage a cooperative
process to find solutions. The framework for the discussion will be based on the
points identified in a letter from the appellant (Amanda McCarthy) to the Council
dated May 5, 2013, as on file with the Community Development Department,
identifying 6 points that may be incorporated as additional conditions of approval
to ameliorate concerns, as listed below:
i. Replace the doors andlor windows of the home to be more "soundless"
ii. Installing an A1C system so that the windows do not need to be open
when it is hot
iii. Conducting a study of "comps" near other large" home daycares to
determine any effect of home daycares on property value while also
engaging a realtor and appraiser/broker to fully understand any
implications for the future sale of your home (my understanding is that
there is no difference between 8 children and 14 children)
iv. Requiring a set drop-off and pick-up time "set window" to reduce any
perceived impacts of these activities
V. Requiring a 6 -month or I -year (biannual or annual) renewal of the
permit
vi. Revocation of the permit if any conditions agreed to by neighbors
surface
4. The 6 month review is to be administered by Planning Division staff, and shall follow the
following procedures:
a. At least 4 weeks prior to the expiration date, the applicant shall be responsible to
submit in writing an update and status on their discussions with concerned
residents, staff from Community Action Marin and Baypoint Lagoons HOA.
b. Planning Division staff will mail a 15 -day public hearing notice for a Zoning
Administrator public hearing to request any written or oral comments on operation
of the use and the discussions/agreements made by the working group.
If there are no significant issues raised from the affected parties, the Zoning
Administrator shall have the authority to extend the Use Permit in perpetuity and
o
incorporate as conditions of approval any and all agreements made by the parties
for continued operation of the large family day care.
d. If there are significant issues raised or lack of agreement, the Zoning Administrator
shall refer the matter for review and action by the City Council. This may result in
the non -extension of the Use Permit, requiring that the large family day care cease
and operate as a small family day care (8 or fewer children) in a single family
home.
e. No application fee will be required for this review.
5. The subject property shall be used in substantial conformance with the floor plans and
parking/loading plans submitted and stamped Approved May 20, 2013, and shall be the same as
required for issuance of a building permit (if necessary), subject to the listed conditions of
approval.
6. The applicant shall inform clients in writing (printed in both English and Spanish, or any
appropriate language required by the client) that the approved parking and loading plan is
located along Baypoint Drive and no client parking is allowed in the garage driveway apron, the
cul-de-sac, or guest parking spaces in the cul-de-sac. A copy of the parking and loading plan
instructions to clients shall be forwarded to the Planning Division.
7. No accessory structure over 80 square feet is allowed in the side yard of the property. No
stationary play equipment shall be located in required side yards.
8. Outdoor activities may only be conducted between the hours of 7:00 am to 6:30 pm.
9. Any new child care service other than the existing approved Ramirez Child Care Services
at 23 Baypoint Drive would require an amendment to Use Permit (UP12-022). Such an
amendment review shall be done at the Zoning Administrator level, with required public
notice.
10. All requirements of the San Rafael Municipal Code and of the implementing zone classification
of Planned Development (PD 1562) for the subject property must be complied with unless set
forth in the permit and by the conditions of approval.
11. The approval of this permit shall be contingent on approval by the San Rafael Fire Department.
Any changes resulting from requirements of the San Rafael Fire Department shall be submitted
to the Community Development Department for review and approval prior to commencement
of construction.
12. Minor modifications or revisions to the project shall be subject to review and approval of the
Community Development Department, Planning Division. Modifications deemed not minor by
the Community Development Director shall require review and approval by the original
decision making body, the Zoning Administrator.
13. The applicant shall comply with all applicable requirements of the City, County, State, and
other responsible agencies.
14. This Use Permit (UP12-022) is only valid as long as the facility maintains a valid license from
the State of California as a Family Day Care Home. The day care is currently approved by the
State of California under Facility # 214005252.
I, ESTHER C. BEIRNE, Clerk of the City of San Rafael, hereby certify that the foregoing
resolution was duly and regularly introduced and adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council
of said City held on Monday, the 3rd day of June 2013, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: Colin, Connolly, Heller, McCullough & Mayor Phillips
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: None
a
ESTHER C. BEIRNE, City Clerk
CITY OF SAN RAFAEL
.�*...4 �.
INSTRUCTIONS: USE THIS FORM WITH EACH SUBMITTAL OF A CONTRACT, AGREEMENT,
ORDINANCE OR RESOLUTION BEFORE APPROVAL BY COUNCIL / AGENCY.
SRRA / SRCC AGENDA ITEM NO. 3° b
DATE OF MEETING: June 3, 2013
FROM: Paul Jensen, Community Development Director (CP)
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
DATE: May 28, 2013
TITLE OF DOCUMENT: A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SAN RAFAEL UPHOLDING AN
APPEAL (AP13-001) AND OVERTURNING THE FEBRUARY 26, 2013 PLANNING COMMISSION
DECISION TO GRANT AN APPEAL (AP12-007) AND OVERTURN THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR'S
APPROVAL OF A USE PERMIT (UP12-022) ALLOWING THE OPERATION OF A LICENSED LARGE
FAMILY DAY CARE (9-14 CHILDREN MAXIMUM) IN A TWO-STORY SINGLE FAMILY TOWNHOME;
THEREFORE, THE USE PERMIT FOR A LARGE FAMILY DAY CARE AT 23 BAYPOINT DRIVE STANDS
AS APPROVED WITH CONDITIONS (APN: 009-362-20)
<Z� ?_ �T)a u l :1,0 w v�
Department Head (signature)
'Z,A'F�, 3,�K
*** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** ***
(LOWER HALF OF FORM FOR APPROVALS ONLY)
APPROVED AS COUNCIL / AGENCY APPROVED AS TO FORM:
AGENDA ITEM:
City Manager (signature) City Attorney (signature) �