|
56 Draft
<br /> 1 Kevin Hornik: So, to cut to the chase, I think we have a number that we'd be willing to propose, and then a minor
<br /> 2 modification threshold that we'd be willing to propose. I think the applicant would be willing to
<br /> 3 propose that there will be, at any given time, there will be no more than 20 clients, staff, and
<br /> 4 trainees or residents on site at any given time, and that an adjustment to that number of more than
<br /> 5 10 percent would be considered a major modification. So, if they wanted, if they wanted to add two
<br /> 6 people that could be on site at any given time, that would be a minor modification that could be
<br /> 7 approved at staff level. If they wanted to add three people, whether that's three clients, three staff
<br /> 8 members, three interns, or some combination of that, any of those things, it would be a major
<br /> 9 modification that would require us to come back through.
<br /> 10
<br /> 11 Leon Meyers: And to be clear, that was 20 people or 20 clients?
<br /> 12
<br /> 13 Kevin Hornik: Twenty people. 20 people. Inclusive of clients, staff, and then I think it's mentioned in the materials
<br /> 14 they often have, you know, trainees from the school of social work or psychiatry residents on-site
<br /> 15 training.
<br /> 16
<br /> 17 Leon Meyers: Those people might be considered staff.
<br /> 18
<br /> 19 Kevin Hornik: So, those people would be included. If you want to include them as staff, define them as staff,
<br /> 20 that's fine, but no more than 20 people on site at any given time.
<br /> 21
<br /> 22 Leon Meyers: Cy, the notion of defining what would be a minor or major modification to the special-use permit,
<br /> 23 I'm disinclined to get into that. Do you have a thought about it?
<br /> 24
<br /> 25 Cy Stober: If we don't characterize it as a minor modification, we could characterize it with planning director
<br /> 26 approval, an additional two spaces or 10 percent increase could be permitted. If we want to avoid
<br /> 27 the modification language of the UDO and just use,just defer to planning director approval for an
<br /> 28 increase of up to 10 percent.
<br /> 29
<br /> 30 Leon Meyers: So, a change of—why not just say 22 as a limit?
<br /> 31
<br /> 32 Cy Stober: That's really up to the applicant, but I mean that makes more sense to me, frankly.
<br /> 33
<br /> 34 Leon Meyers: That's fine.
<br /> 35
<br /> 36 Nora Dennis: I just wanted to clarify that this would be for clinical purposes, and I ask that just because at times
<br /> 37 there are non-profit functions that might engender like more than 20 people being there at one
<br /> 38 time. Like we're having a fundraiser, and some people are coming with their children, and I can't
<br /> 39 say, "No, only 22 people can come," because that's not the nature of it. I'm thinking like, this is for
<br /> 40 like if there's the clinical nature of work. Is that correct?
<br /> 41
<br /> 42 Leon Meyers: So, would it be acceptable to say clients and staff?
<br /> 43
<br /> 44 Nora Dennis: Yeah, I think that would be great. Thank you.
<br /> 45
<br /> 46 Cy Stober: So, for point of clarity, and just for everyone in the room, we do have a special event permit that
<br /> 47 allows for special events on properties that could be in conflict. So, I'm glad Dr. Dennis brought
<br /> 48 that up. So, this would still permit her to have special events on the property that are explicitly for
<br /> 49 non-profits. So, yeah, that's helpful.
<br /> 50
<br /> 56
<br />
|