Laserfiche WebLink
146 <br />PLANNING 8 ZONING <br />November 13, 1985 <br />Page Two <br />as possible in order to complete the addition he is putting on the <br />building to accommodate the day care center. <br />After lengthy conversation on this issue, the Board asked Mr. Kluegel <br />to refer the issue to the City Attorney and have the Attorney present <br />to the P g Z and then to the Council all of the changes which would <br />be necessary in order to address the operation of day care centers <br />within the City (presently the City code does not address the oper- <br />ation of day care centers). <br />The ordinance amendment should: 1) be consistent with current state <br />laws and requirements, 2) address daycare centers and group home <br />care centers, 3) allow operation of day cares as conditional use in <br />the NB, LB and GB districts, 4) not allow commercial day care centers <br />in industrial zones (unless required under state laws), 5) address <br />operation of day care offered as an employee benefit (rather than <br />a primary business) to companies within the City (all zones), 6) <br />change City code to allow day cares as a permitted use rather than <br />a conditional use in residential zones (per state regulations). <br />During the course of this discussion Mr. Johnson relayed the fact <br />that many cities include a phrase in their City codes such as <br />"prohibited if not specifically permitted" for any such operation <br />which is not addressed within the City code. He suggested that a <br />similar phrase be included in the Lino Lakes City code so that if <br />future situations involve a particular type of business which is <br />not specifically addressed, the P 8 Z and City Council will have <br />control of the situation. <br />Mr. Goldade felt that the City should not be charged legal consult- <br />ant charges for this issue because the City code is not consistent <br />with state laws and it was presented as consistent when it was pro- <br />posed. <br />Mr. Jim Shafer (accompanying Mr. Amundsen) asked whether there was <br />any ordinance stating that the operation of this day care center <br />would be in violation of the City code. The opinion of the Board <br />and the City Planner was that there was nothing at all addressing <br />the operation of day care centers. <br />Mr. Amundsen noted that currently the day care center is operating <br />in a GB district at the church. <br />Mr. McLean said "Under the current circumstances, I feel they could <br />go about their business" and because the operation of a day care <br />is not specifically addressed, "In the meantime, the road is <br />open ". <br />Mr. Johnson suggested that the operation of a day care could be <br />construed to fall into the category of "music, dance, business or <br />trade schools" which are permitted uses. Mr. Prokop said that he <br />would prefer not to interpret the code in this way, but rather have <br />the City Attorney make the necessary changes outlined above in <br />order to specifically address the issue. <br />1 <br />1 <br />1 <br />