Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Childcare topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council signals support to pursue code change to raise in-home daycare cap to 16, asks staff to propose mitigations
Summary
City planning staff briefed the council on an applicant-requested text amendment to raise Murray's in-home day‑care limit from 12 to 16 children. Council members expressed mixed support but directed staff to draft ordinance language with mitigation measures including neighbor signatures, additional off-street parking and pickup protocols.
Planning staff on June 3 sought council direction on whether to pursue a code change that would allow in-home day-care operators to increase the permitted number of children from the current cap of 12 to as many as 16.
Zachary Smolin, a city planner, told the council the change would follow a permissive state posture: Utah allows cities to adjust home-day-care limits, and nearby jurisdictions vary widely. Smolin said state law governs caregiver-to-child ratios and square-footage-per-child standards; those rules would remain in force regardless of a local cap.
Council members and staff discussed common neighborhood impacts—especially parking, circulation at drop-off and pick-up, and the possibility that several large home‑day‑care operators could cluster on a block. Smolin and other staff outlined mitigation options the city could include in a text amendment: requiring additional off‑street parking (for employees and staggered parent drop‑off), conditioning larger capacities (16–18) on planning‑commission review, requiring neighbor signatures for major home‑occupations, and narrower allowable business hours.
Council members repeatedly emphasized public-safety and neighborhood quality-of-life concerns but also cited the shortage of child-care capacity and the benefit of neighborhood‑based providers for working parents. After discussion, council members told staff to proceed with drafting a text amendment and to return recommended code language and conditions (parking, hours, neighbor-notice requirements) for formal consideration. The council noted the city already receives inquiries and that one active application is in the pipeline.
No final ordinance was adopted June 3; staff will draft the proposed amendment and bring it back for public hearings and planning-commission consideration.
