2CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
INTER-OFFICE MEMORANDUM
To: The Honorable Mayor Stoddard and Memb rs of the City Commission
Via: Hector Mirabile, Ph.D., City Manager &
From: Christopher Brimo, AICP vr(
200t
Planning Director
ITEM NO._c..:d=-.c.-_. 40_ Date: December 6, 2011
SUBJECT:
An Ordinance amending Section 20-2.3 of the Land Development Code titled Defmitions in
order to amend the defmition of "Day Care Center", replacing day care with" Child Care
and Child Care Facility"; and amending of the Land Development Code titled Permitted
Use Schedule in order to replace the use "Day Care Center" with "Child Care and Child
Care Facility"; amending the permitted use schedule for the LRM18, RJ'iI24 and RO from
permitted use (P), to special use (S); amending Section 20-3.4 -Special use conditions;
providing a reference to the Florida Statute governing these uses.
REOUEST
A application for a day care center was recently submitted to the Planning & Zoning Department
for review and approval by the Environmental Review and Preservation Board (ERPB). During
the review, questions arose regarding the adequacy of the current definition of these uses in the
City's Land Development Code (LDC).
Staff reviewed the current regulations governing "day care centers", "child care", and "child care
facilities" that are enumerated in Chapter 402 -Health and Human Services: Miscellaneous
Provisions, Florida Statutes, and detennined that it would be appropriate to utilize a similar
definition in the City's LDC, and to also reference the State standards for the operation of these
facilities.
On October 11, 2011 the Planning Board held a public hearing to discuss the proposed
amendments to the definition of Day Care Centers. After both public and Board comments, the
Board recommended that the item be brought back at the next available meeting with the
following additions:
1. Staff change the use from "pennitted" to "special use" in residentiai districts;
2. Staff consider the application of standards used for charter schools when reviewing child care
facilities as a special use.
On November 8, 2011, the Board held a second public hearing to review the recommended
changes from the October II, 2011 meeting. The following reflects proposed changes to the
definition, changes to the pennitted use schedule, and changes to the special use conditions for
child care facilities.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS
ARTICLE II. -DEFINITIONS
20-2.3 -Definitions.
Child care, shall mean the care, protection, and snpervision of a child, for a period ofless than 24
hours a day on a regular basis, which supplements parental care, enrichment, and health
supervision for the child, in accordance with his or her individual needs, and for which a
payment. fee, or grant is made for care.
Child care facilitv, shall include any child care center or child care arrangement which provides
child care for more than seven children unrelated to the operator and which receives a payment.
fee, or grant for any of the children receiving care, wherever operated, and whether or not
operated for profit. The following are not inclnded:
Ca) Public schools and nonpublic schools and their integral programs;
0) Surmner camps having children in full~time residence;
Cc) Summer day camps;
Cd) Operators of transient establishments, which provide child care services solely for the guests
of their establishment or resort.
Standards for the operation of a child care facility shall be in compliance with Chapter 402, and
Section 402.305; Florida Statutes.
Day care center shall have the same meaning as .£see Child Care Facility Shall mean any
establishment providing for the daytime eare of seven (7) or more mildren whim are not
members ofthe resident family.
SECTION 20-3.3(D)
PERMITTED USE SCHEDULE
P ~ PERMITTED BY RIGHT
S ~ PERMITTED AS SPECIAL USE
COND ~ SPECIAL USE CONDITIONS (See Section 20-3.4 )
PARK ~ PARI<ING REQUIREMENTS (See Section 20-4.4(B»
X = No conditions were adopted
USE ZONING DISTRICT
TYPE R R R R R R R L R R L M N S G M T
S S S S S T T R M 0 0 0 R R R U 0
I 2 3 4 5 6 9 M 0 A D L
I 4 H D
8
M
U
4
PUBLIC Al"lD INSTITUTIONAL USES
PayGafa I'~ P. ~ P. P. P. P. l' P. P
Geffief ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Child
Care
Facility
(7 or
more
children)
T T T T H P P C P
0 0 0 0 I R 0 A
D D D D N R
D D D D D K
M L P P
U I I R
5 4
P P P ~ P 23 10
Section 20-3.4 -Special use conditions
(23) SCHOOLS & CHILD CARE FACILITIES: The following requirements shall be
applicable to all schools and child care facilities allowed as a special use:
(g) (+) The maximum student capacity of a school (K-12) shall not exceed one hundred and
fifty (150) students per net acre based upon the site size of the property.
(12) The maximum capacity of a child care center shall be governed by life safety
and licensing staudards for such facilities, as amended.
C£) (~) Notwithstauding the parking requirements set forth in Section 20-4.4(B) (12), all
schools, except high schools, shall provide one parking space for every three
hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area. High schools shall provide one
parking space for every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area.
(g)(::» The proposed school shall meet State staudards for class size and for recreation and
open space.
(~)( 4) A traffic study to include a parking impact on the sUITounding neighborhood aud
requirements for adequate queuing on site shall be provided indicating the impact
of the proposed facility on the surrounding area; the traffic study consultant shall contract with
the City aud be paid for by the school applicaut.
(.f) Child care facilities with fifteen (15) or more children shall be required to provide a
traffic circulation plan, a traffic study, if required, aud a facilities impact statement to the
Planning Department for review. The Planning Department and the Police Department
will assess the information aud determine whether a traffic study is warranted based on
the proposed number of children aud the surrounding neighborhood conditions. The
traffic circulation plan must be supported by the data for the use m:mroved before a
license to operate the facility may be issued. If a traffic study is warranted, the traffic
study consultant shall contract with the City and be paid for by the child care facility
applicant. If the traffic circulation piau is not supported by the data, then the permit may
not be issued unless the applicant complies with appropriate mitigation.
(g)(!}) All required parking for the school and child care facility shall be located on site.
(11)(6) The drop off aud pick-up loading zone areas for students and children attending the
child care facility shall be completely accommodated on site.
(i)(+) All proposed driveways, vehicular circulation, and parking areas shall be designed
to avoid a back up of traffic onto a public right-of-way.
(1)(g) No ingress or egress to a school or child care facility shall be permitted through
abutting residentially zoned parcels.
()&)(9) When adjacent to a residential zone district, a landscape opaque buffer shall be
constructed along dividing property lines.
(D(W) All playground and athletic activities areas shaH be accommodated on site.
(m)(H)There may not be any school activities on site after 11 :00 p.m.
(n)(H) The school and child care facility shall be financiaHy responsible for the appropriate
solution of any problems that arise after approval.
(Q)(H) If the proposed school or child care facility, or the traffic generated by the school or
facility is, in the future, determined by the Director of Planning, to be adversely affecting the
health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity of the proposed use, or to be
detrimental to the public welfare or to the property or improvements in the neighborhood, or to
be not in compliance with other applicable Code provisions, the special use approval may be
modified or revoked by the City Commission upon notification and public hearing.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Commission approve the proposed amendments as presented
Backup Documentation:
• Draft Ordinance
• Planning Board Minutes
Z:IComm Items\20 11 112-6-11 IChild Care Facilities AmendmentILDC Amendment_Child Care Facility_Report 11-30-ll.doc
1
2
ORDINANCE NO. _____ _
3 An Ordinance amending Section 20-2.3 of the Land Development Code. titled Definitions in
4 order roamend the definition of "Day Care Center", replacing day care with n Child Care
5 and Child Care Facility"; and amending of the Land Development Code titled Permitted Use
6 Schedule in order to replace the use "Day Care Center" with "Child Care and Child Care
7 Facility"; amending the permitted nse schedule for the LRlVI18, RlVI24 and RO from
8 permitted use (P), to special us.e (S); amending Section 20-3.4 -Special use conditions.;
9 providhlg a reference to· the Florida Statute governing these uses.
10
11 WHEREAS, the only reference in the Land Development Code to Day Care
12 Centers was contained in the defmitions and permitted use schedule; and
13
14 WHEREAS, the Planning & Zoning Department proposed an amendment to the
IS definition to be consistent with Florida Statutes, changing Day Care Centers to Child Care
16 and Child Care Facilities; and
17
18 WHEREAS, the Planrling Board at its October 11, 2011 regular meetings, after a
19 public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 7 ayes, 0 nays recommending that Child
20 Care Facilities be changed from a permitted use to a "special use", and that similar
21 conditions used to review schools be utilized in the review of Child Care Facilities; and
22
23 WHEREAS, the Planning Board at its November 8, 2011 regular meeting after
24 public hearing, adopted a motion by a vote of 7 ayes 0 nays recommending approval of the
25 proposed amendment, and recommending that the City Commission adopt the proposed
26 amendments; and
27
28 WHEREAS, the City Commission desires to accept the recommendation of the
29 Planning Board and City Administration and enact the aforesaid amendments.
30
31 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE MAYOR AND THE CITY
32 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI, FLORIDA:
33
34
35 Section 1. That Section 20-2.3 titled "Definitions" is hereby amended as follows:
36
?J7 20-2.3 -Definitions.
38
39 Child care, shall mean the care, protection, and supervision of a child, for a period ofless
40 than 24 hours a day on a regular basis, which supplements parental care, enrichment, and
41 health supervision for the child, in accordance with his or her individual needs, and for
42 which a payment,. fee, or grant is made for care.
43
44. Child care facility, shall include any child care center or child care arrangement which
45 provides child care for more tha..'l seven children unrelated to the operator and which
46 receives a payment fee, or grant for any of the children receiving care, wherever operated.
47 and whether or not operated for profit The following are not included:
48 (a) Public schools and nonpublic schools and their integral programs;
49 (b) Summer camps having children in full-time residence;
2
(c) Summer day ca.mps;
2 Cd) Operators of transient establishments, which provide child care services solely for the
3 guests of their establishment or resort,
4
5 Standards for the operation of a child care facility shall be in compliance with Chapter 402.
6 and Section 402.305; Florida Statutes.
7
8 Day care center shall have the same meaning as Child Care Facility Shall mean any
9 establishmOflt providing for the daytime care ofse\_ (7) ormOFe childreR ';;chich are not
10 members of the resideRt fumily,
11
12 Section 2. That Section 20-3.3(D) titled "Permitted Use Schedule" is hereby amended as
13 follows:
14
15 SECTION 20-3.3(D)
16 PERMITTED USE SCHEDULE
17
18
P = PERMITTED BY RIGHT
S = PERMITTED AS SPECIAL USE
COND = SPECIAL USE CONDITIONS (See Section 20-3.4 )
PARK = PARI<lNG REQUIREMENTS (See Section 20-4.4(B»
X = No conditions were adopted
USE ZONING DISTRICT
TYPE R R R R R R R L R R L M N S G
S S S S S T T R M 0 0 0 R R R
1 2 3 4 5 6 9 M 2
1 4
I
8
I
PUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USES
Day Cafe P P jl jl jl jl jl
Gefller ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Child
Care
Facility
(7 or
more.
children)
M T
U 6
A D
H D
M
U
4
p p
~
I
T T T T H P P C P
0 0 0 0 I R 0 A
D D D D N R
D D D D D K
M L P P
U I I R
5 4
p p P S P 23 10
19 Section 3. That Section 20-3.4(23) titled Special Use Conditions is hereby amended as
20 follows:
21
22 Section 20-3,4 -Special use conditions
23
24 (23) SCHOOLS & CHILD CARE FACILITIES: The following requirements shall be
25 applicable to an schools and child care facilities allowed as a special use:
26
27 @) (+) The maximum student capacity ofa school (K-12) shall not exceed one hundred
28 and fifty (150) students per net acre based upon the site size of the property.
3
I
2 (Q)
3
The maximum capacity of a child care center shan be govemed by life safety
codes and licensing standards for such facilities, as amended,
4
5 (£) (;?,) Notwithstanding the parking requirements set fOTh" in Section 20-4.4(B) (12), an
6 schools, except high schools, shall provide one parking space for every three
7 hundred (300) square feet of gross floor area. High schools shall provide one
8 parking space for every two hundred (200) square feet of gross floor area.
9
10 . (Q)(el-) The proposed school shall meet State standards for class size and for recreation
II and open space.
12
13 (S")( 4) A traffic study to include a parking impact on the surrounding neighborhood and
14 requirements for adequate queuing on site shall be provided indicating the
IS impact of the proposed facility on the surrounding area; the traffic study
16 consultant shall contract with the City and be paid for by the school applicant.
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
(f) Child care facilities with fifteen (! 5) or more children shall be required to provide a
traffic circulation plan, a traffic study, if required, and a facilities impact statement
to the Planning Department for review. The Planning Department and the Police
Department will assess the infonnation and detennine whether a traffic study is
warranted based on the proposed number of children and the surrounding
neighborhood conditions. The traffic circulation plan must be supported by the data
for the use before a license to operate the facility may be issued. If a traffic study is
warranted, the traffic study consultant shall contract with the City and be paid for
by the ci:rild care facility applicant. lfthe traffic circnlation plan is not supported by
the data, then the pennit may not be issued unless the applicant complies with
appropriate mitigation.
(g)(~) All required parking for the school and chUd care facility shall be located on site.
32 (11)(6) The drop off and pick-up loading zone areas for students and children attending
33 the child care facility shall be completely accommodated on site.
34
35 Q)(;t) All proposed driveways, vehicular circulation, and parking areas shall be designed
36 to avoid a back up of traffic onto a public right-of-way.
37
38 (.i)(%) No ingress or egress to a school or child care facility shall be pennitted through
39 abutting residentially zoned parcels.
40
41 Q9(9) When adjacent to a residential zone district, a landscape opaque buffer shall be
42 omstructed along dividing property lines.
43
44 m(-Hl) All playground and athletic activities areas shall be accommodated on site.
45
46 (m)(H)There may not be any school activities on site after 11 :00 p.m.
47
4
1 (11)(+;6) The school and child care facility shall be financial1y responsible for the
2 appropriate solution of any problems that a,--ise after approval.
3
4 (Q)(+';) If the proposed school or child care facility, or the traffic generated by the school or
5 facility is, in the future, determined by the Director ofPlanni11g, to be adversely affecting
6 t.'1e health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity of the proposed use, or
7 to be detrimental to the public welfare or to the property or improvements in the
8 neig.lJ.borhood, or to be not in compliance with other applicable Code provisions, the
9 special use approval may be modified or revoked by the City Commission upon
10 notification and public hearing.
11
12 Section 4. If any section, clause, sentence, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason
13 held invalid or unconstitutional by a court of competent jurisdiction, this holding shan not
14 affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance.
15
16 Section 5. This ordinance shall become effective irmnediately after enactment.
17
18
19
20 PASSED AND ADOPTED this ____ day of ____ , 2011.
21
22
23
24 ATTEST: APPROVED:
25
26
27
28 CITY CLER.l( MAYOR
29 1 st Reading -
30 2nd Reading -
31
32
33 READ AND APPROVED AS TO FORM COMMISSION VOTE:
34 AND SUFFICIENCY: Mayor Stoddard:
35 Vice Mayor Newman:
36 Commissioner Palmer:
37 Commissioner Beasley:
38 Thomas F. Pepe =::--______ _
39 CITY ATTORNEY
COlTh'Ilissioner Harris:
40
41
42
43
44
CITY OF SOUTH MIAMI
PLANNING BOARD .
Regular Meeting Minutes ....
. Tue~day, Novernber8, 2011
.·City Commis~ionChambets
. 7:30 P.M.' .
City of South Miami Ordinance No. 08-06-1876 requires all lobbyists before engaging in any lobbying activities
to register with the City Clerk and pay an annual fee 0/$500 per Ordinance No. 44-08-1979. This applies to all
persons who are retained (whether paid or not) to represent a business entity or organization to influence "City"
action. "City" action is broadly described to include the ranking and selection afprofessional consultants, and
virtually all-legislative, quasijudicial and administrative action.
I. Call to Order and the Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag
Action: The meeting was called to order at 7:37PM
Pledge of Allegiance was recited in unison
U. Roll Call
Action: Dr. Whitman requested a roll calL
Board Members present constituting a quorum:
Dr. Whitman (Chairman), Mr. Cruz (Vice-Chairman), Mrs. Yanoshik, Mrs. Beckman, Mr.
Dundorf, Dr. Philips, and Mr. Vitalini
Board Member absent: None
City staff present: Mr. Christopher Brimo (Planning Director), Mr. Marcus Lightfoot (Permit
Facilitator), Ms. Tiffany Hood (Office Support).
City staff absent: Ms. Lourdes Cabrera (Principal Planner)
City Attorney: Mr. Thomas Pepe.
III. Administrative Matters
Mr. Brimo presented the Board with Supplement 14 of the Code of Ordinances (Note: Land
Development Code), which included all of the ordinances that were codified from 2010 through
January 2011
IV. Public Hearings
PB-ll-029
Applicant: City of South Miami
An Ordinance amending Section 20-8.9 of the Land Development Code titled Special
Exceptions within the TODD district, in order to include additional criteria for derming
large scale developments; providing additional conditions for review and approval;
providing for the expiration and extension of approvals; and providing an effective date.
Dr. Whitman read the item into the record.
Page 1 of7
C:IUserslcbrimo.CSM IlAppDatalLocallMicrosoftl W indowslTemporary Internet FiIeslContent.OutlooklNMT AODSOIPB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -11-08-11.doc
Mr. Brimo presented the item to the Board.
Dr. Philips asked for clarification of the tenn "substantial completion" which can be found in the
proposed amendment on page 4 of 6.
Mr. Brimo responded that the language used was added to the code in 2010. This language is in
use in both the Hometown and the TODD district. He then stated that projects would be
reviewed in this manner with two years to start and five years to be substantially complete. Last,
Mr. Brimo stated that substantial completion is approximately eighty percent.
Mr. Vitalini stated that architecturally, substantially complete is defined as the building is usable
for the tenant to occupy although it is not one hundred percent complete. Mr. Brimo then stated
that essentially you could then get a temporary certificate of occupancy (TCO). Mr. Vitalini
responded yes.
Mr. Cruz asked for a definition of substantial completion to be included in the Land
Development Code (LDC).
Mrs. Yanoshik stated that the City Commission reduced the time frame from five (5) years to
three (3) years based on the Shops at Sunset Place project.
Mr. Brimo responded that he defer to the Board due to the fact that this issue came before both
the City Commission and ERPB in 2010. Dr. Whitman stated that this issue was discussed by the
City Commission at length and amended. Mr. Brimo stated that the item being presented mirrors
the Hometown District.
Mrs. Beckman stated that we should substantiate what substantial is, document it 111 the
ordinance, state the cost, and reason for the extension.
Mr. Brimo stated the revisions to the proposed ordinances.
The Board held a discussion on the proposed item.
Dr. Whitman asked if these changes would be reflected in the Hometown District. Mr. Brimo
responded yes. Dr. Whitman then stated that special exceptions are not tenned as special use
Dr. Philips requested consistency of word usage throughout the proposal. Mr. Pepe restated the
need for consistency throughout the proposal as well.
The Board held a discussion on the proposed ordinance.
Mrs. Beckman asked if there was a project in the City of South Miami that is 40,000 square feet.
Mr. Brimo stated that there presently were no projects in the City. However, should there be any
project that exceeds 40,000 square feet then these processes would be triggered.
The Chairman opened the public hearing:
Page 2 of7
C:IUserslcbrirno.CSM I IAppDatalLocaJ\Microsoftl WindowslTernporary Internet FilesIContent.OutlookINMTAODSO\PB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -1l-08-11.doc
NAME ADDRESS SUPPORT/OPPOSE
Sharon McCain Support
Ms. McCain commented on page 5 of 7, Section 4 of the proposal regarding the terminology of
potentially cause adverse impacts. She also stated that she feels that 5 years is too long of a time
frame and should be changed so that it will expire after three (3) years. McCain asked Mr. Brimo
if the ordinances can be more defined. Mr. Brimo responded that the Board can make
recommendations to amend them.
The Chairman closed the public hearing:
Mrs. Beckman stated that we should define substantial completion.
Motion: Mr. Dundorf motioned to amend page 5 of 7, Section 40f the proposal. He proposed an
amendment to the wording of "potentially cause adverse impacts" and prefers the tenn "will
likely cause adverse impacts". The motion was not seconded, therefore it dies.
Motion: Mrs. Y anoshik motioned to amend Section 20-8.9(C)( 4)(i) so that it read additional
screening and buffering; with a perpetual maintenance agreement covenant running with the land
and recorded with the Miami-Dade County Clerk of Courts. The motion was seconded by Mrs.
Beckman.
Mr. Brimo asked Mr. Pepe ifit would be constituted with the development agreement or would it
be with development of order. Mr. Pepe responded that it would be a development of order and
include the recommended language elsewhere in the document. Mr. Brimo recommended that
this request be implemented in the required conditions section of the LDC.
The Board held a discussion on the proposed amendments.
Mr. Cruz suggested recommendations.
Dr. Whitman recommended that staff collaborate with the City Attorney and a paragraph be
inserted in order tG implement these amendments. Mr. Brimo then suggested inserting the
paragraph in the required conditions section of the LDC.
Mrs. Yanoshik withdrew her motion to amendment Section 20-8.9(C)(4)(i) so that it is read as
additional screening and buffering; with a perpetual maintenance agreement covenant running
with the land and recorded with the Miami-Dade County Clerk of Court.
Motion: Dr. Philips proposed an amendment that a paragraph be inserted in the LDC with staff
using the appropriate language so that the applicants maintain the remedial measures that have
been agreed upon. The motion was seconded by Dr. Whitman.
Vote: Yes 7, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mr. Vitalini: Yes
Page 3 of7
C:IUserslcbrimo. CSM llAppDatalLocallMicrosoftl Windowsl Temporary Internet FileslContent. Outlook\;'1MT AODSOWB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -llNOS-II.doc
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Amendments
Motion: Mr. Vitalini motioned to change the allotted time for the completion of the project from
5 years to 3 years. The motion was seconded by Mrs. Beckman.
Vote: Yes 7, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mr. Vitalini: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion: Dr. Whitman motioned to revise the language in Section 20-S.10(G) that "set forth
below" be changed to read "set forth". The motion was seconded by Mr. Cruz.
Vote: Yes 7, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mr. Vitalini: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
The Board voted on the proposed ordinance as a whole with the amendments.
Vote: Yes 7, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mr. Vitalini: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
PB-ll-031
Applicant: City of South Miami
An Ordinance amending Section 20-2.3 of the Land Development Code titled Definitions in
order to amend the defmition of "Day Care Center", replacing day care with "Child Care"
and Child Care Facility"; provides a reference to the Florida Statute governing these uses;
and providing an effective date.
Page 4 of7
C:IUserslcbrimo. CSM 1 IAppData\Localll'v!icrosoftl Windowsl Temporary Internet FileslContent. OutlooklNMTAODSOIPB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -11-08-11.doc
Mrs. Yanoshik read the item into the record.
Mr. Brimo presented the item to the Board.
Mr. Brimo stated that the Board recoTIL'1lended that there be changes made to the amendment.
Mr. Dundorf asked staff if this change was made regarding the definition of Day Care Center. He
also asked if this change was limited to only children or would it also include Adult Day Care
Facilities. Mr. Brimo responded that the term "Day Care Center" found in the LDC only refers to
children.
The Chairman opened the public hearing
NAME ADDRESS
Sharon McCain
SUPPORT/OPPOSE
Opposed
Ms. McCain voiced that the allowance for a Child Care Facility of seven (7) or more children
was too broad and thinks that there should be guidelines for the number of children allowed. She
stated that an impact study should be performed. She then stated that this use should be changed
to special use and the allowance of parking is too much for the Child Care Facility. Last, she
stated that there should be a provision for where the playground should be located.
The Chairman closed the public hearing
Amendments
Motion Mr. Dundorf made a motion to change the hours that children can be left at the facility
from 24 hour to 16 hours. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cruz.
Vote: Yes 2, No 4
Mrs. Beckman: No
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: No
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: No
Dr. Philips: No
The motion failed due to the vote.
Motion Dr. Whitman motioned to amend the ordinance so that Day Care Facilities would require
special use approval iTl the Mixed Use Affordable Housing (MUAH) zoning district. The motion
was seconded by Dr. Philips.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Page 5 of7
C,IUsers\cbrimo. CSM llAppDatalLocallMicrcsoftl WindowslTemporary Internet FileslContent. OutlooklNMT AODSOIPB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -11-08-ll.doc
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion Dr. Whitman motioned to permit hospitals to allow a Day Care Facility on site for the
employees of the hospital. The motion was seconded by Mr. Cruz.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Y a.noshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion Mrs. Yanoshik proposed an amendment to change LO, MO, NR, and SR to special use.
The motion was seconded by Beckman.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik:Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion: Mr. Cruz motioned to change the numbers to letters. The motion was seconded by Mr.
Dundorf.
Mr. Brimo stated that he would look into the numbering of the ordinance. Therefore, this motion
was not voted on.
Motion: Mr. Cruz motioned to modifY the ordinance in order to divide Section 4 up in order to
provide a more defined impact statement. The motion was seconded by Dr. Whitman.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion: Dr. Whitman moved to change Section 4 of the ordinance in order to remove the phrase
"30 or more children." The motion was seconded by Mr. Cruz.
Mr. Dundorf asked Mr. Brimo what the cost would be for a Child Care Facility. Mr. Brimo
responded that it would depend on the firm that was used. It could run anywhere from $1,500 to
several thousands of dollars.
Page 6 of7
C:IUserslcbrimo. CSM IIAppDatalLocallMicrosoftl WindowslTemporary Internet FileslContent.OutlooklNMT AODSOiPB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -11-08-11.doc
Vote: Yes 5, No 1
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: No
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
Motion Mr. Dundorf motioned to strike the parking requirement for a Child Care Facility. There
was no second to this motion therefore the motion failed.
Motion Mr. Cruz made a motion to approve the ordinance as a whole with the amendments. Dr.
Whitman seconded the motion.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
V. Approval of Minutes:
Planning Board Minutes of October 11, 2011 -The Board members reviewed the minutes and
were in favor of approval of the minutes with no changes.
Motion: Mr. Cruz motioned for approval of the minutes as presented. Mrs. Beckman seconded
the motion.
Vote: Yes 6, No 0
Mrs. Beckman: Yes
Mr. Cruz: Yes
Dr. Whitman: Yes
Mr. Dundorf: Yes
Mrs. Yanoshik: Yes
Dr. Philips: Yes
VI. Future Meeting Dates: Tuesday, December 13,2011
VII. Adjournment: Dr. Whitman adjourned the Planning Board meeting at 9:54 PM.
Page 7 of7
C:IUserslcbrimo. CSM I IAppDataILocallMicrosof\\ WindowslT emporary Internet FileslContent. OutlooklNMT AODSOIPB Draft
Regular Meeting Minutes -II-08-II.doe