• Ongoing coronavirus / COVID-19 discussion: how is the pandemic affecting your community, workplace, and wellness? 🦠

    Working from home? So are we. Come join us! Cyburbia is a friendly big tent, where we share our experiences and thoughts about urban planning practice, planning adjacent topics, and whatever else comes to mind. No ads, no spam, no social distancing.

Define "primary" vs "accessory" in your city

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
Niiiiice- she emailed both Mayor and Council and flat out lied about the original application (saying "staff" lied about everything). Not to mention calling the house her "residents". Argh.
 

michaelskis

Cyburbian
Messages
20,037
Points
50
I agree with Rich Townsend on the issue, there needs to be deed work. If it came here, and if she wanted to continue, I would have her combine the deeds, but keep them as per parts on one deed. That way, they can be divided when it comes time to sell some day.

I think that your commission did the right thing by denying this day care.

Let us know what happens.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
michaelskis said:
I agree with Rich Townsend on the issue, there needs to be deed work. If it came here, and if she wanted to continue, I would have her combine the deeds, but keep them as per parts on one deed. That way, they can be divided when it comes time to sell some day.

I think that your commission did the right thing by denying this day care.

Let us know what happens.
I asked about possible deed work, at this point it's a no-go. She went on record saying they were looking for a larger home to run the business out of, but when that didn't happen the house next door was for sale and they bought that instead.
Infact, she wouldn't be in this mess if she would've listened to staff in the first place, withdrew, and submited with all of the facts in place and in print for the public to see. As it stands right now it was advertised as an in-home daycare, meaning she lives there full time, but that's not the whole story.

I just got done writing a 5 page response to the allegations in her letter.

My head hurts!
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
It was continued to the next meeting

After hearing the case and asking a few questions, Council asked staff to attempt a few more site visits. THen I got a call for the paper for a statement. Damn damn damn.
 

Jen

Cyburbian
Messages
1,704
Points
25
hot peppers on the grill

Fascinating discussion, if only that woman had a smidge of business acumen rather than trying to pull it off 'under the table' probably at the behest of friends and family advice. And maybe some folks&residents and small business owners) feel that they cannot acheive their own goals by having to hammer applications and such thru the governmental channels.

For every person that walks into the planning office and presents plans the "right way" how many bypass those doors altogether?

and Good Luck Habanero
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
Thanks, sometimes it feels like I need it with this case.

Question for the day: when can you consider two properties jointly as one principal dwelling unit?
 

biscuit

Cyburbian
Messages
3,904
Points
25
Habanero said:
Thanks, sometimes it feels like I need it with this case.

Question for the day: when can you consider two properties jointly as one principal dwelling unit?
I don't work in zoning but I would assume only if they are on the same lot and/or they are connected in a way that combines them into a single structure.
 

SW MI Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
3,194
Points
26
Question for the day: when can you consider two properties jointly as one principal dwelling unit?
I'm out of it today - was that a serious question or rhetorical? Because my answer is that you can't. If you have two properties each with a dwelling, they can't be combined or considered as one.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
SW MI Planner said:
I'm out of it today - was that a serious question or rhetorical? Because my answer is that you can't. If you have two properties each with a dwelling, they can't be combined or considered as one.
It was a serious question. And your answer is exactly how I'm hoping Council will respond.

I had an idea though. First she applied for 10 children. Now she's saying she never wanted that many and only wants 4. A parent even got up and said she had promised them she wouldn't take care of more than 4. So, how about calling her bluff. Say, "fine, you can have 4, but anything changes and you have to come back in". That way, she gets what she is saying she wants (now) and she loses credibility in the long run when/if she comes back and reapplies. Stip it that both houses, per this application, are considered as one as long as they own both homes and she can have no more than 4 for compensation.
 

SW MI Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
3,194
Points
26
I think that sounds like a good compromise (even though I still don't think you should have to). I would be careful of it setting a precedent though. Other people come in and for whatever reason want to do something similar and point to her and say "well, she did it, why can't I!?".

That's pretty common here, so just a thought :)

Also, would you easily be able to know (or control) the number of children she has? If you do a site inspection and find 8 children - what would be the recourse? Any agreement made between the City and her should contain some sort of language that would nullify it in the event she violates it. Here, the state takes care of monitoring day cares, so I don't know how easy/difficult it would be to verify how many children she would have.
 

Cardinal

Cyburbian
Messages
10,080
Points
34
If she is licensed by the state, she would probably be licensed for a certain number of children. You might contact the state and either 1) inform them when she applies for her license that she is only permitted x number of children, or 2) if she is already licensed, check what the license says about the number of children.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
Cardinal said:
If she is licensed by the state, she would probably be licensed for a certain number of children. You might contact the state and either 1) inform them when she applies for her license that she is only permitted x number of children, or 2) if she is already licensed, check what the license says about the number of children.
Unfortunately, our state doesn't require a license for less than four children in a home. They know of the situation, have returned her application, and made it clear she would have to apply for a commercial license if she wants to expand beyond 4 children. That's what would be good about just approving her for 4- she would have to get a commercial license from them and then we could say what's good for the goose- apply for a commercial license with us as well.

I have to do another site inspection this morning per Council's request. Should be fun.
 

Gedunker

Moderating
Staff member
Moderator
Messages
11,434
Points
39
I'm the newbie. I've been reading this thread and commiserating with Habanera.

To my surprise, our creaky old Zoning Code actually anticipated this problem. In the event that an individual owns adjacent lots or parcels, strictly for the purposes of zoning, all are considered one lot regardless of lot lines, parcel lines, et cetera. This is important, because we must take the larger view: a 50' x 150' lot is one thing in the abstract, something entirely different in light of its place in a neighborhood.

Why do I have the feeling that she's going to get some sort of approval then turn around and market the second dwelling as "approved for commercial daycare"?

Yeesh.
 

Habanero

Cyburbian
Messages
3,241
Points
27
oooh, I'm a minion!

<took the link out>

I just wish, for once, they could know all the facts before forming on opinion. Perhaps it's not so big of a deal if she only wants five children, which is now the current amount (from 10 to 4 to 5). But, it's still that we cannot verify after the application is approved that she would still live in the house, it'd be difficult to enforce. Perhaps even if the application had been forthcoming with all of the facts this wouldn't be the situation.
 
Last edited:

SW MI Planner

Cyburbian
Messages
3,194
Points
26
I'm sorry you have to deal with such BS. If she was only having 4 children would she really need that much extra space as to warrant a second dwelling unit? Oh, and now it's 5 children?

What does your City Attorney say about the situation?

Maybe it was better to be called a 'minion' than be called out by name, so maybe your lucky there :)
 
Top