In-Home Daycare Special Use Permit

Spoke in favor of the daycare, highlighting positive experiences and noting that surrounding cities like Georgetown and Liberty Hill allow licensed home daycares.

Spoke in opposition, arguing that the facility operates as a preschool rather than a casual daycare, violates subdivision CCRs and HOA rules, and causes traffic and parking issues.

Attempted to speak on neighbor conduct but was cut off by the chair for violating meeting decorum rules.

Chose the school for her daughter due to the owner's dedication and quality of education. Appreciated the hands-on learning and felt Leander was family-friendly. Highlighted clear instructions on drop-off/pick-up and parking, and the positive impact on her daughter's confidence and academics.

Her children attended the daycare 14 years ago and benefited greatly from the owner's teaching of self-sufficiency, responsibility, and confidence. She sees the lasting foundation the owner helped build and considers her a tremendous asset.

As community association manager for Magnolia, he reiterated the HOA's opposition due to covenant violations and the secluded cul-de-sac location. Felt the owner was looking to move and that the HOA is against the daycare being there.

Stated the owner was frightened and targeted by a neighbor, which was the primary reason for considering a move. Emphasized the difficulty of finding quality, affordable childcare in Leander and that the daycare is a valuable asset. Argued that other homes in the community also run small businesses and have converted garages.

As VP of Magnolia HOA, he echoed previous HOA statements, cautioning against making a special exception for a business in a neighborhood with restrictive covenants. Suggested that other daycare owners have found commercial locations.

As counsel for the association, he argued that any non-residential use undermines the HOA's purpose and violates deed restrictions regarding visibility, traffic, and noise. He noted the original request was for babysitting during COVID, not a daycare, and rezoning would not erase restrictive covenants.

Found the daycare during a difficult time (divorce) and it helped shape his son's future with increased confidence and advanced learning. Praised the owner for staggering times to minimize impact and asked the city to approve the permit to support home daycares and small businesses.

His child was a student and received good support, moral teaching, and advanced education. Emphasized the owner's strictness on parking and avoiding noise, stating parents always park in her driveway. Believes it's a vital resource and would be a loss if she had to move.

Supported the daycare, recalling approving it during COVID due to family matters forcing the owner to move it home. Believes the home is suitable for a daycare in a cul-de-sac and the aesthetics haven't changed. Notes low traffic and that most residents work from home or are retired.

Expressed overwhelming positive experience with his son attending the daycare. Highlighted the owner's exceptional care for his son's challenges (stuttering) and dedication to respectful neighborly conduct, including parking and avoiding noise.

Lives behind the daycare and stated she hears no disruption from the children. Pointed out that only one bordering property owner is against it and asked for compromise on parking issues, noting the daycare's positive community impact.

Praised the owner for helping his daughter with the ELE program and navigating the system for her learning disability, enabling her to be ready for kindergarten. Noted that other homes in the area also have businesses and questioned why this owner is being targeted.

A fellow teacher, she chose Montessori for her children due to its benefits, and both are in accelerated classes. Stated the owner has been bullied by her neighbor and is a single mom living alone. Highlighted the diverse support for the daycare and the need for such options.

Opposed the permit, citing it as a violation of deed restrictions and a detriment to his quality of life due to increased traffic, congestion, blocked driveways, and safety concerns. Expressed worry about property values and setting a precedent for commercial use in the neighborhood.

Her son was a student and received a strong foundation in education, guidance, and discipline. Believes Dew Drops should be permitted to offer this level of education and safety while allowing parents to manage finances.

Representing the Magnolia HOA, he stated the HOA was surprised by the agenda item and opposed the business, citing a violation of deed restrictions. Mentioned a previous conversation where the owner indicated she was moving. Asked the commission not to allow the change to preserve neighborhood character.

Spoke in support of the daycare, highlighting the owner's passion, trustworthiness, and dedication to children's education and social skills. Stated that the daycare is discreet with no signs or excessive cars.

A former employee, she stated she never drove to work to ensure parking for parents. Argued there's no more impact than construction in the neighborhood and that the owner is teaching young minds. Claimed the complaining neighbor is the one causing disturbance.

Her son attended the daycare 16 years ago and is now graduating high school, attributing his success to the owner's care. She noted the owner is afraid of some neighbors and that the operation is discreet. She asked the commission to support small businesses.

Strongly supported the permit, citing the smaller caregiver-to-child ratio, individualized attention, and quality Montessori education. Mentioned affordability and the quiet, non-disruptive environment with staggered scheduling.

A lifelong Leander resident, he stated his two children attended the daycare and would not be who they are today without the owner's impact. Emphasized the need for more families to have access to such guidance.

Supported the daycare, stating it fills a community need for accessible and affordable childcare. Believes it operates responsibly, follows safety guidelines, and does not cause disruption, citing staggered drop-offs and pick-ups.