Laserfiche WebLink
10 <br /> Mum Day Care Center <br /> Order <br /> Page -2- <br /> A review has been made of the record in this matter and of the findings, <br /> conclusions, conditions and the decision. Witness Weissenfluh is correct in <br /> stating that the November 2, 1989, document is silent about the use of the <br /> driveway as generating noise and disruptions to the neighborhood. <br /> Accordingly, in order to have condition #3 conform to the findings and <br /> conclusions as entered, the following amended findings of fact derived from <br /> the record developed at the hearing are made part of the decision: <br /> FINDING #21 <br /> A witness at the public hearing, Gloria Shapley, testified <br /> that she owns an adjoining parcel of land. She submitted that <br /> vehicles parking on the Applicant's driveway in the early <br /> morning hours are disruptive to the peace and enjoyment of her <br /> property. She requested denial of the Special Property Use <br /> Permit. <br /> FINDING #22 <br /> The City Planning Department recommended pick up and drop off <br /> for the day care facility occur in the designated parking <br /> spaces on Beverly Lane rather than in the driveway on-site. <br /> The basis of the City's recommendation was that the use of the <br /> driveway created traffic disruptions to Beverly Lane and that <br /> these disruptions could cause accidents. <br /> Condition #3 is a very volatile and emotional issue and in my deliberations I <br /> have taken into consideration the children's safety. It is presumed, however, <br /> that the parents will consider their children's safety when leaving the <br /> vehicles that are parked along Beverly Lane. It appears to me that the <br /> dhildren's safety is imperiled more by a balking out of the driveway onto <br /> Beverly Lane then exiting the vehicles in the parking spaces provided along <br /> Beverly Lane. All of the witnesses testified that Beverly Lane is a highly <br /> traveled road with high speeds. It appears that the most acceptable method of <br /> access to the site that is not disruptive to the neighbors, and, is safe for <br /> the children, is that as required in condition #3. <br /> Accordingly, condition #3 remains as stated. <br /> II. CLARIFICATION OF CONDITION #9 <br /> Patricia Mum in a letter of November 13, 1989, requested clarification of <br /> condition #9 which states: <br /> 9. Active play equipment and activities shall be located to <br /> minimize noise impacts on neighbors: For example: move <br /> play equipment (swing set) to the south of the garage. <br /> 83 <br />