Supporting Child Care Development in San Mateo County

Best Practices and Recommendations

Developed for the City of San Mateo/City Managers’ Association By the Child Care Coordinating Council

With a grant from ‘First 5 San Mateo County’ Commission Kristen Anderson, Consultant

February 2003

2

Supporting Child Care Development in San Mateo County

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY In San Mateo County, there is a commitment by multiple public and private agencies to assist with solutions to the serious child care shortage. This commitment is expressed by the inclusion of child care as a quality of life and economic factor affecting those who live and work here. Child care is becoming recognized as a ‘missing piece’ in community development, with links to housing, employment and transportation. Land use policy and permitting barriers were identified as one of five major goal areas which need to be addressed, in the Strategic Plan of the Child Care Partnership Council of San Mateo County. The County Children’s Report Initiative’s Child Care Action Campaign, endorsed by over 70 agencies, organizations and individuals, identified this area of work as one of only four key strategies to pursue, to reach the goal of increasing licensed child care supply by 10% in five years. Municipal governments can play a unique role, due to their primary authority regarding land use and planning for local communities and neighborhoods. Zoning and permitting of child care facilities can significantly affect the availability of licensed child care (centers and homes). Other proactive strategies can further lead to capacity-building and, for families, to accessibility of facilities and services. This report will focus on the first area (i.e. ‘permit streamlining’), and provide some information on long-term strategies, and roles cities can play, with recognition of the fiscal constraints they are under. Examples of policies, practices and model projects are provided. The following recommendations will be described in more detail in the report. Recommendations: Reducing barriers in zoning ordinances and permit processes Clarify treatment of different types of child care in zoning ordinances and ensure

consistency with state law; Eliminate permit requirements for Large Family Child Care Homes, allowing them

‘by right’; at least reduce to ‘non-discretionary permit’ option defined in law; Put in writing permit requirements from all city departments, and make accessible to

potential child care providers Provide training for city/county staff who provide child care permit assistance. Allow child care centers in all types of zones, with a use permit; Reduce requirements for child care centers in non-residential zones (e.g. parking). Recommendations: Long-range planning and Proactive Strategies Incorporate child care policies in General Plans, including land use, housing,

transportation/circulation, and others as appropriate;

3

Offer developer incentives for inclusion of child care space; Identify opportunities and resources of each city/county, which can be mobilized or

contributed to develop or improve child care facilities. Next steps 1. Appoint a subcommittee to study the recommendations and bring back for

endorsement by the City Managers’ Association. 2. Apply for a grant from First 5 San Mateo County Commission, to implement

recommendations, for cities that identify specific tasks and a plan to accomplish them.

4

Supporting Child Care Development in San Mateo County

The need for high quality, affordable and accessible child care in San Mateo County has been established in many reports over the past few years. These have included: San Mateo County Children’s Report, the Human Services Agency Plan, Sustainable San Mateo County’s Indicators Project, Child Care Partnership Council Needs Assessment and Strategic Plan, and SAMCEDA’s 1999-2000 Economic Indicators and Trends report. Solutions have been proposed and various strategies are currently being implemented to support existing child care resources as well as to create new ones. The high cost of living in San Mateo County and the shortage of affordable facilities for expansion are only two of the factors which make this work more difficult here than in many counties. The good news is that there is a high level of awareness, on the part of elected officials and policymakers in our county, regarding the importance of child care—for children’s development, for family health and self-sufficiency, and for the local economy.1 In addition, organizations and public agencies have a history of exceptional cooperation and collaboration on projects serving children and families. The Peninsula Partnership for Children, Youth and Families is a good example of unusual collaboration by the County, many cities and school districts, and community nonprofit agencies. The SmartKids Fund for new child care facilities is a new funding partnership which combines public and private funding sources. First Steps Child care development does not always respond to market demand due to many factors. High quality child care is necessarily a labor-intensive, highly regulated service, which leaves little or no profit margin to support debt, especially in San Mateo County. With essentially no public entitlement funding support, the industry is subsidized by low teacher salaries and low space costs—usually minimal rent in school or church-site classrooms. Resources to develop new facilities are very limited. Cities and counties play an essential role in either encouraging or discouraging the development of new child care facilities. While there are many exciting and creative ways public agencies are supporting child care development, in San Mateo County and across the state, there are planning and land use policies and permit processes which serve as barriers. Removing or reducing these barriers is an essential first step. It is most cost-effective to reduce barriers and allow those child care operators, who have some resources, skills, and motivation, to assume the burden of expansion or new development. The South San Francisco Child Care Facilities Fee Ordinance Report (2001) estimated the cost of construction of new child care center was $20,500 per child space (including some land cost), while the per space cost of new modular buildings (assuming free land) was $8,333. Family child care homes generally develop without 1 The “Economic Impact of Child Care in San Mateo County” report (2001) estimated that the child care industry generated almost $150 million in gross receipts annually, and supported over 6,000 jobs (3,400 employed directly in child care programs and 2,600 indirect jobs).

5

financial assistance. So it’s reasonable to argue that permit streamlining is a cheaper strategy.

Reducing Barriers to Child Care Development: “Child Care Friendly” Zoning Codes and Permitting Processes

Background Cities and counties which are interested in promoting the development of child care, or, at least, not discouraging it, can start by examining the policies and permitting processes regulating both family child care homes and child care centers(including preschools, infant centers, etc.). The American Planning Association’s Policy Guide on the Provision of Child Care, 1997 (Appendix A) lists many recommendations regarding zoning and permitting of both child care centers and family child care homes in both residential and non-residential areas. In order to understand why these processes can be barriers, the following generalization, about typical child care operators, is presented. Obviously, exceptions always exist. Child care operators are, generally, individuals, small ‘mom and pop’ businesses, non-profit agencies, etc., which have little or no ‘developer’ expertise, and may not understand local government structure, areas of responsibility, jurisdiction, timelines, approval processes/bodies, etc. For example, some confuse the terms ‘planning commission’ and ‘planning department.’ Sometimes, with family child care providers, even the concept of needing to be licensed by the State is new (i.e. “But I’m just babysitting.”) When confronted with long, unfamiliar application forms, various fees and approvals from multiple departments, public hearings, etc., some will decide it’s too difficult and costly (on top of other start-up expenses and processes) and will give up their plans. Family child care homes, which are fairly invisible (and indistinguishable from caregiving relatives who are ‘license-exempt’), may decide to operate without a permit or state license (if they can do so unnoticed). Focus groups were held in October 2002, with child care professionals in San Mateo County, including child care center, family child care home providers, and agency directors. They were asked to share their experiences in opening, or trying to open, new or expanded child care programs. They identified zoning restrictions, delayed decisions, and lack of consistent information between city departments as barriers to

“Signage requirements were very costly and time-consuming. I spent 6 hours at a meeting with Planning Department on this issue. We needed a sign permit just to put up a temporary “Grand Opening” sign.” “City planners were unwilling to ‘think outside the box. We wanted to work out a parking solution with a church across from our center, but the City was not cooperative in helping with a creative solution.”

-- Focus group participants, 10/02

“Every time our center would begin to look at property in these cities, we would be deterred from our efforts by all the requirements involved (e.g. needs assessment, parking requirements, traffic/noise concerns, etc.) We changed our minds after realizing what had to be done to the site to meet the requirements.” (Focus group participant, 10/02)

6

start-up and expansion of child care facilities. Participants were also asked what was helpful, or what supports cities provided, with the process. Key characteristics of ‘child care-friendly cities, which were cited, included:

• informed, responsive city staff; • clear, written child care permitting requirements; • regulations allowing large family child care ‘by right’ or centers and/or centers

allowed in more zones; • offering incentives or encouragement to developers to include child care in their

non-residential or residential projects; • good cooperation between cities and school districts related to afterschool care

programs. The problems, which need to be addressed in San Mateo County, include the following. ♦ Many cities in the County have zoning ordinances and permit requirements in place

which are inconsistent with specific provisions in state law. ♦ Permit requirements, processes, and fees for family child care homes are different in

cities across the county, which is very confusing for child care providers, and for city or child care coordination staff or state Licensing staff who try to assist them.

♦ Inconsistent information is often given by staff within a city. ♦ Permit fees, for those cities which require permits, range from zero to $1600. The goals of work in this area are: a) to ensure that policies and processes used by cities or the county are the least

restrictive possible, or are, at least, consistent with State laws; and b) to minimize the paperwork, time, cost, and public hearing processes that can stop

development of a program. Though, it can be argued, these are things any business or developer must deal with, both the resources (funds and expertise) and the potential ‘payback’ (even recovering expenses) are less, largely due to the marginal nature of the child care ‘business’ model.

Zoning Codes The following specific recommendations relate to sections of zoning codes, which define child care, and what permits are required, if any. When codes do not mention child care, or use inaccurate terms, potential providers may be treated differently depending on the understanding and interpretations of each staff person who responds to requests for information. Definitions 1) Ensure that definitions of family child care homes(‘small’ and ‘large’) and child care

centers in zoning ordinances and permitting processes are consistent with Health and Safety Code §1596.75-.78 (including 1997 change to 8 and 14 children for small/large family child care).

2) Child care (not day care) centers definition should encompass all types of child care

and early education: preschool, nursery school, infant, school-age). Since they are

7

licensed by the State as a single category, the same permitting should apply, with conditions as needed to address any differences related to planning issues, like parking and traffic impacts.

3) Family child care homes should not be grouped with other residential (24-hour) care

types, in definitions and permit requirements. 4) Family child care should not be defined as a “Home Occupation” or required to get

that permit (unless modified to fit this use). Many of the common restrictions on home occupations are inconsistent with what California law requires of family child care or with the purpose of family child care. These include restrictions on: the amount of the home used for the business having an employee who is not a resident using outdoor space for the business having vehicle traffic associated with the business.

Application of these restrictions could be considered in conflict with the state preemption law that requires jurisdictions to allow large family child care homes on lots zoning for single-family residences.

Permit Requirements 5) Ensure that all three (3) types of child care are addressed in the zoning code:

a) Small family child care must be permitted in all zones which allow residential, per Health and Safety Code (state preemption law)

b) Large family child care homes cannot be prohibited on lots zoned for single-family or under different type of permit depending on zone (if single family homes are allowed, family child care are; not under home occupation requirements, treatment consistent with HSC (discussed further below)

c) Child care centers—list any standards which apply in all cases, so potential operators can be prepared (e.g. zones allowed, parking requirements)

6) Specific important distinctions need to be reflected in treatment:

a) family child care homes are licensed only in residences and b) this use must be permitted in all residential zones or mixed-use zones where

residences are allowed.

7) Do not require planning permits to be renewable, especially for Family Child Care. While it may be important to have a process in place to review, after a period of time, whether conditions of a permit are continuing to be met, requiring public noticing and review invites new objectors/objections. A family child care provider should not have to constantly fear having a permit revoked if she is meeting the prescribed conditions.

8

Family Child Care Home Treatment Treatment of family child care homes in city codes and permit processes, specifically ‘large’ family child care for 12 or 14 children2, is probably the most problematic barrier reported by providers and 4C staff who assist them. Currently at least three cities in San Mateo County are having difficulty clarifying and enforcing their permit requirements for large family child care homes. California planners are more familiar with the State preemption law that prohibits regulation of many types of community care facilities for six or fewer occupants (e.g. residential care and treatment homes). California Health and Safety Code §1597.40 (Appendix B) regarding large family child care homes (for 12 or 14 children) specifies that local jurisdictions may not prohibit large family child care homes and have three options for treatment:

1) to allow them by right, as is required for small family child care; 2) to require a non-discretionary permit, with no hearing and specifying “prescribed

reasonable conditions” related to only four potential impact factors: parking, traffic, noise, and spacing or concentration of homes; or

3) to require a (modified) conditional use permit and process which a. May only address the same four areas of potential impact with ‘prescribed

reasonable conditions’ b. Must only require noticing within 100 feet, and c. Must only hold a hearing if requested by an affected party (i.e. a neighbor

or the prospective licensee). Eight cities-- Menlo Park, San Carlos, Foster City, Half Moon Bay, San Mateo, Woodside, East Palo Alto, and Burlingame-- allow large family child care homes by right (no planning permit required, only the state license), and report that this does not create problems for them. Two cities, South San Francisco and Redwood City, and the County have ‘non-discretionary’ permits, and the other cities require conditional use permits. Cities which are experiencing difficulties with these permit processes would find it more cost-effective to not regulate this use.

Other Permits and Requirements Fire Clearances and Permits California’s child care licensing regulations require a fire clearance for Large Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers, before they can be licensed. Community Care Licensing orders the inspection/clearance from the local designated building or fire department. Large Family Child Care Homes are classified as R-3 and Child Care Centers as E-3 occupancies. It is important that the correct occupancy classification is 2 Family child care homes were formerly defined in HSC as ‘small’: up to 6 children including the provider’s children under 10 yrs.; and ‘large’: up to 12 children. In 1997, legislation was adopted to increase the availability of school-age child care for 6-12 year olds. It allows either small or large family child care homes to enroll an additional 2 children six years or older. Certain conditions must be met, including reducing enrollment of children under 24 months, and notification of parents and landlords, so many do not serve school-age children.

9

used and that no excessive or unnecessary additional requirements are imposed.3 Child care providers and 4C staff report that inspectors sometimes apply child care center requirements or residential (24-hour) care facility requirements to family child care homes. Though fire/building inspectors may feel they have the right and responsibility to add any requirements they believe will help ensure the safety of the children, some of these may be excessive/unnecessary, and are likely to prevent the provider from proceeding. For example, a building inspector who was doing a fire clearance for large family child care home told the provider (a renter) she needed to brick up an unused fireplace and install a fire alarm system in the house. (Neither is required for R-3 occupancies by state code.) Consider that the family child care provider may be a renter. Often landlords are unwilling to allow alterations to the home, and may try to evict the provider for doing child care (though that’s illegal). Another issue is the requirement, in some cities, of an annual fire permit and fee. This is not a state requirement (beyond the initial clearance). City building or fire inspectors may not be aware that Community Care Licensing requires that both small and large family child care homes have fire prevention equipment and fire escape/disaster plans, and that they conduct regular fire and disaster drills with the children. Business Licenses A city/county business tax or license may be required of Large (but not ‘small’) Family Child Care Homes, and child care centers. In San Mateo County, four cities and the County do not require business licenses of LFCCH. Many cities exempt non-profit centers. Any exemptions, from business license requirements which can be allowed, are recommended. Child care programs are already marginal businesses. A study of the child care workforce in San Mateo County found that the average net income of a ‘small’ family child care home provider was $15,075, while that of a ‘large’ home provider was $36,029.4

Streamlining Permit Processes The following are some recommendations regarding permits and their processing, which facilitate the development of new child care and preschools. Many cities and counties in California and other states have adopted these policies.

3 Health and Safety Code §1597.46(d) specifies that “No city, county, city and county, or district shall adopt or enforce any building ordinance or local rule or regulation relating to the subject of fire and life safety in large family day care homes which is inconsistent with those standards adopted by the State Fire Marshal, except to the extent the building ordinance or local rule or regulation applies to single-family residences in which day care is not provided.” 4 Center for the Child Care Workforce, “A Profile of the San Mateo County Child Care Workforce” (2002). Net income is calculated as gross income less an assistant’s salary and business expenses. Providers reported working 46 hours per week with children, on average, plus 15 hours for business-related activities.

10

1. Make permit processes, for different types of child care programs, as clear, simple

and timely as possible. Having the process and requirements in writing (i.e. a child care/preschool ‘start-up’ flyer or brochure) is helpful (discussed further below). The cities of San Mateo, South San Francisco and Redwood City publish such brochures.

2. Reduce or eliminate planning permit and processing fees, and business license/tax.5

As there are many other expenses involved with starting a large family child care home or child care center, high Conditional Use Permit (CUP) fees can be a significant barrier. In San Mateo County, Use Permit fees (in those cities which require CUPs) for Large Family Child Care Homes range up to $1600 (the city’s standard use permit fee for businesses of all sizes).

3. Make permit applications as simple and clear as possible, avoiding requirements

which will require hiring professionals (e.g. architectural drawings) especially for family child care homes, or where no structural changes are being made.

4. Where possible, delineate standard requirements in advance, so potential child care

providers can judge whether it’s feasible to pursue a project. For example, parking requirements in addition to the State licensing requirement for playground space render many potential buildings unusable for a child care center, unless accommodations can be made.

5. Train staff (at least one person), who will be handling child care inquiries and

permits, on requirements and processing of child care center and large family child care home permits (if any), so consistent information is provided.

6. Facilitate the access to permit assistance, particularly by existing small family child

care home providers who may have difficulty leaving children in her care at home, or bringing them along, to visit the planning department.6 Having information and forms available on a website or by e-mail or postal mail, and having extended planning counter hours, are helpful (as they are for the general public).

7. If public hearings are required as part of the jurisdiction’s permit requirements for

either child care centers or large family child care homes7, be prepared for common concerns (and misunderstandings) that arise, most often from neighbors but sometimes from planning commissioners, or elected officials. These include: Viewing family child care homes as a ‘commercial business’ which should not be

allowed in residential neighborhoods, especially single-family zones (where family child care most commonly happens for many reasons).

Overestimating the traffic and parking impact caused by the family child care or center, based on an assumption that it operates as a ‘school’ with scheduled times when all children arrive and leave. This situation occurs most often with part-day preschool, if children can enroll for only ‘limited-hours’ sessions – e.g. 9:00 a.m. to 11:30 a.m. In contract, in most child care (homes and centers), families drop

5 Note: Small family child care homes cannot be assessed these fees per Health and Safety Code. 6 Most family child care homes serve families from around 7:00 a.m. to 5:30-6:00 p.m. 7 Allowed for large family child care homes under the most ‘restrictive’ treatment option allowed in Health and Safety Code §1597.46(a)—a modified conditional use permit.

11

off and pick up children over a two- to three-hour time period in the early morning (e.g. 7:00 a.m.-9:30) and late afternoon (e.g. 3:00-6:00), due to parents’ varying work schedules and commute patterns.

Other concerns and beliefs that are unrelated to planning issues or neighborhood impact, but which ‘color’ neighbors attitudes toward the prospective operation of a child care program near them. These include: children should be at home with their mothers (who shouldn’t work), child care is poor quality and/or bad for children, while ‘preschool’ is good; child care is a highly profitable business (since it’s expensive).

Information Dissemination The previous section details how to ensure that zoning codes and permitting processes are consistent with State law, clear, fair and not excessively burdensome to potential child care providers. A next step is to communicate this information to potential program providers in a clear and consistent manner. This section will discuss a few clear actions local governments can take to ensure this outcome. Child Care Start-Up Guide It can be helpful to develop a brief, written (and website version) document describing City/County and State requirements and steps to start a child care center, preschool or family child care home. Such a guide has both external and internal value to a city/county and to the child care community. It saves time of staff and potential child care operators, when all requirements, for the two defined categories of facilities, are listed in one place. Such a ‘start-up guide’ should include the following types of information, which can be organized in different ways:

1) definitions of child care centers and family child care homes (‘small’ and ‘large’), as specified in state law (Health and Safety Code §1596.75-.78)

2) city/county permit requirements and application processes and timelines, and contact information for relevant departments (e.g. planning, fire inspection) Planning, Fire, Building, Business License divisions/departments. Other requirements which pertain to all residential properties can be referred to (signs, structural changes, etc)

3) information about State child care licensing— that a license is required for most types of programs, and contact information for the District Office of Community Care Licensing in San Bruno. Basic requirements (as well as the full regulations) and a list of district offices can be found at http://ccld.ca.gov.

4) contact information for other resource agencies or departments, such as the Child Care Coordinating Council, the county’s Child Care Partnership Council, Chamber of Commerce, family child care association, etc.

12

The written guide can be in a brochure or flyer format.8 An example of a child care start-up guide (San Mateo’s) can be seen at www.cityofsanmateo.org/downloads/residents/child_care_startup_guide.pdf. This type of child care start-up guide also serves to clarify, for all parties, the specific definitions of the types of facilities and roles of different regulatory agencies. Even potential child care providers are sometimes confused about which type of facility they intend to open. Planning, building, or fire inspection staff are sometimes confused by the various types of residential facilities (e.g. family child care homes versus residential group homes), or child care centers and family child care homes. In addition, the process of writing the guide necessitates that staff from various departments communicate about their different requirements and how they relate (possibly for the first time), checking requirements for consistency with other planning policies (and state laws), and training staff who will respond to public inquiries. Use of Start-up Guide The child care start-up guide can be made available in hard copy from the planning counter, city hall, library, and other places where the public finds information. It is especially helpful, from the child care perspective, to have one planner trained in this area, who handles child care inquiries and proposals from the public. This planner should have on hand copies of the state regulations for Family Child Care Homes and Child Care Centers, as well as the contact information for DSS/Community Care Licensing and the Child Care Coordinating Council, the local child care resource and referral agency. A website version, of the child care start-up guide, is particularly handy because links can be included to: ♦ the city and county departments, zoning code, and actual permit forms, and ♦ ‘external’ resources like Community Care Licensing (including licensing regulations)

and the Child Care Coordinating Council. It is useful to provide copies of the guide to the Child Care Coordinating Council, where potential child care operators often call for assistance, and to the Community Care Licensing District office. Libraries and community service agencies (who may encounter potential providers) are also possible distribution points. Child Care Zoning Chart Another tool, which has been produced in some localities, is a chart showing in which zones child care centers and homes are permitted by right, or with a ministerial or administrative permit, or with a conditional use permit. An example is provided in Appendix C. A chart can be useful to child care operators who are looking for sites for new facilities, particularly centers, and to planning staff who can quickly answer a potential operator’s questions about appropriate areas of the community to target. 8 It can be helpful to use the term“ Child Care and Preschool” in the title of the guide, to clarify for staff and the public, that the requirements apply to all types of early care and education facilities.

13

Of course, the child care operator should use that information in conjunction with other data-- about child care needs and resources in a neighborhood, demographic information, need for subsidized care, etc.--to determine whether programs are needed and, if so, what type.

14

Long-Range Planning and Proactive Strategies

For Supporting Child Care Development I. General Plans Addressing child care in a city or county General Plan recognizes its existence as part of the infrastructure of a community—physical, economic and social. Child care has not traditionally been considered, for various reasons. It is still considered, by many planners and elected officials, to be a social issue rather than a land use and planning issue.9 Yet child care has links to housing, employment and transportation, both in terms of land use planning and for the lives of working families who must access child care facilities twice daily, usually. It has been a ‘missing piece’ in planning for community development. Those connections should be recognized in the general plan, to ensure that the child care demand, generated as communities grow and mature, is considered. Planning proactively can avoid higher development costs and neighborhood resistance which result when facilities are later shoe-horned into inadequate, redeveloped, or undesirable sites. San Mateo County’s C/CAG recognized these links in the Congestion Management Plan’s Land Use Guidelines, which require large developments (residential and non-residential) to mitigate new vehicle trips generated. Child care measures, including on- or near-site child care, are included in the many optional trip mitigation measures available to developers. At the present time, in San Mateo County, only South San Francisco’s General Plan includes substantial child care policies (Appendix D). The County’s draft revised (2/03) Housing Element proposes new policies in this area. How Can Child Care Be Addressed? Child care policies can be, and have been, included in city and county general plans in different ways: as policies embedded in mandatory or optional elements, or as a separate child care element. South San Francisco’s recent General Plan update (1999) included child care policies in the following elements: Land Use; Transportation/Circulation; Parks, Public Facilities and Services; and Economic Development. City of Santa Rosa’s 2002 General Plan update included child care policies in a Youth and Families Element. It is important that policies address the availability of child care facilities where families live and work, and the links to other infrastructure, such as commute routes and public transit. The American Planning Association’s Policy Guide on the Provision of Child Care (Appendix A) states a number of policy positions, including:

9 Similarly, affordable housing is both a social problem and a land use issue.

15

♦ “Encourage communities to remove obstacles to the provision of regulated child care

in all zoning districts, in locations that are appropriate and safe for children” (#3); ♦ “Encourage communities to negotiate with developers and to offer incentives to

provide space for child care in all types of projects, residential, office, mixed use, and commercial, including new construction and reuse” (#4);

♦ “Support local legislation (zoning ordinances) which provide for child care in

locations convenient to neighborhoods and in public facilities such as schools, recreation and social service centers, and subsidized housing projects. Procedures to locate child care facilities should not be overly burdensome and should be related to the size and land use impacts of the facility” (#6).

In summary, the goals of policy setting, whether in the General Plan or other community planning documents, is to remove or reduce barriers and to plan proactively for child care, along with other needs and uses. Since there is no ‘public system’ of child care as there is for education, for example, this important early education/family support service and community facility is often neglected. Background Information: Existing Conditions A first step in the development or major revision of any city or county general plan is the compilation of background information, including demographic data, current uses, existing conditions and needs, projected trends, planning issues, proposed areas and types of future development, etc. Sometimes this information goes into a separate, extensive report; in other cases, information is provided in the introduction of each element. It is important that basic data, at least, about child care resources and needs be included at this stage, since this background report provides the foundation for development of general policies as well as implementation strategies, priorities for funding, and implementation responsibilities within the jurisdiction. Available Data Child care needs and resources data is available in San Mateo County in the Needs Assessment document produced by the Child Care Partnership Council of San Mateo County.10 This state-mandated and -funded planning council, appointed by the Board of Supervisors and County Superintendent, is required to complete a needs assessment at least every five years. The document has city-level and county-wide data, which can be updated for specific purposes such as city-specific planning. Mapping For the purpose of CalWORKS child care planning, child care supply maps were developed in 2000, for each California county, at the zip code level.11 These ‘ratio’ maps 10 Available at www.smcoe.k12.ca.us/news/needsassess.pdf 11 These are available on the website of the California Child Care Resource and Referral Network: www.rrnetwork.org

16

(e.g. number of licensed infant care slots per 100 children 0-2 years) are useful for assessing major gaps in child care capacity, where populations of children of different age groups, or children of CalWORKS participant families live, and changes in child population from 1990-99. The Metropolitan Transportation Commission also did mapping, for CalWORKS planning purposes, of child care against public transit routes. Maps showed which routes operated at different times of the day, night and weekends, to provide a real picture of child care available to low-income, often transit-dependent, parents. In addition, some communities have begun to map locations of child care facilities, for the purpose of analyzing the potential impact of new development on existing community child care, and for planning for future child care sites. The City of San Mateo child care report, by 4C, included a map of existing licensed facilities. Many cities and planning consultants are now using GIS mapping for other city planning (and operations) uses. Adding child care facilities as a data layer has many potential uses, which are beginning to be explored. II. Other City/County Child Care Policies South San Francisco The City adopted a Child Care Facilities Fee Ordinance in 2001 which requires payment of an impact fee for demand generated by new development of all types. The city has a plan for creation of new child care spaces, through various means, to meet both existing child care need and future need, and has dedicated its own resources toward that goal. Developers have the option of including child care space in their projects. Redwood City In 1990, a Child Care Policy Report examined the city’s potential roles related to child care, and adopted a Child Care Policy. The city’s support of a child care coordinator/ planner, has resulted in the capture of significant outside public and private resources, and has contributed to Redwood City’s availability of child care and early education spaces to meet about 33% of the estimated need, versus 25% in most cities. San Mateo The City contracted with the Child Care Coordinating Council, in 2001, to produce a report exploring the community child care needs and potential roles and actions to address child care. With a grant from First 5 San Mateo Commission, an implementation plan is being developed. Milpitas and San Jose These cities have recently completed Child Care Master Plans to work toward greater accessibility and quality of child care and early education programs.

17

III. Other City/County Strategies and Partnerships for Funding and Development In addition to policy setting, San Mateo County, its cities, and jurisdictions around the state have undertaken some progressive, creative, and significant initiatives or projects to support child care development and operations. Listed below are types of strategies used and examples of only some of the many projects locally and statewide which serve as models. A) Allocate and leverage funding San Mateo County The Human Services Agency has contributed $1.5M toward the SmartKids Fund, for new child care facilities, as seed money to leverage other public and private resources. The County also contributed $25,000 to the Peninsula Quality Fund for facility renovations in existing centers, and challenged the cities to contribute $1 per child estimated to need child care in their communities. CDBG San Mateo County, and the cities of Daly City, South San Francisco and San Mateo have allocated federal CDBG funds for child care services for targeted low-income and/or special needs populations for many years. In addition, all CDBG grantees have contributed funds for capital projects on occasion, usually for state-funded child care or preschool programs. Half Moon Bay The City assisted Family Council of Half Moon Bay with the installation and utility connections on their modular child care facility in the late 1980s. San Mateo County The County facilitated Coastside Infant-Toddler Center’s purchase of the land under modular buildings. Eliminating their monthly lease payment not only reduces ongoing operational costs, but increases future stability due to site control. B) Work with Developers South San Francisco A new child care center will be constructed by the city on land donated by office park developer, Boston Properties, on Gateway Boulevard (east of 101). The Redevelopment Agency has allocated $2 million toward the construction. The selected child care operator, will raise funds in conjunction with the new SmartKids fund, administered by the Child Care Coordinating Council. The child care center is expected to have a licensed capacity of 100 children, ages 2 months to 5 years. Burlingame The city negotiated the inclusion of child care (and non-profit agency) space in a proposed office development. Real estate market conditions have prevented the project from going forward.

18

East Palo Alto The city negotiated the inclusion of child care space in a new housing development. Daly City In a new Mercy Housing mixed-use project, the ground floor retail space was leased instead to Bayshore Child Care Services, which raised funds for the tenant improvements to create a small infant-toddler center. The City served as broker between the housing developer and child care agency. C) Include child care space in public facilities Redwood City The city provides child care space in three community centers. At Fair Oaks Community Center, space is provided at no cost to a state-subsidized child development program for low-income families. Recently, it contributed CDBG funds to add a modular building to expand services there. At Red Morton Center, the city operates a licensed after-school child care center for 60 school-age children (5-12 yrs.). At Sandpiper Community Center in the Redwood Shores neighborhood, the city leases space to a private provider for before- and after-school care for Sandpiper School children and a morning preschool. South San Francisco The City-operated child care center at Westborough Park was expanded from 16 to 39 spaces by the addition of a modular building. The center has exclusive use of a park playground for limited hours on weekdays. D) Partner with school districts Redwood City In 1993, the Redevelopment Agency provided $.5 million for the construction of three new modular buildings, and playgrounds, to house state-funded child care and preschool programs at Hoover School. Menlo Park and Pacifica Both cities operate state-subsidized child development centers for low-income families, on or adjacent to school sites. E) Facilitate provision of child care for city/county employees San Mateo County The County constructed a 96-child center on its Redwood City campus in 1993. County employees have priority for enrollment, and the infant and toddler spaces are always full. The county also reserves spaces for employees in Daly City’s Imagination Station child care center (adjacent to county offices), described below.

19

Daly City A child care center was incorporated in Daly City’s city hall complex expansion, in 2000, to serve city employees. Care is provided for 45-children, two months to 5 years, by a private child care company. San Diego The City recently constructed “Kiddie Hall”, a child center for City employees, on the 2nd floor of a downtown office building. In addition to the construction costs, the city pays the rent and utilities; the center is operated by a private child care company. F) Lease city/county land for child care use Redwood City Under a long-term land lease from the City, a private developer constructed a 10,000 sf child care center for 156 children, two months to five years, with over 7,000 sf of second floor space leased to another children’s services agency. The City also provided the take-out financing for the facility, which opened January 2003. Palo Alto City-owned land in downtown Palo Alto (part of the former Palo Alto Medical Foundation site) was put out to bid to child care operators for development of a child care facility, as part of a plan for new housing, etc. Under a long-term, nominal land lease, the operator constructed a two-story child care center (92-child capacity, serving ages 2 months-5 years), which opened January 2003. City and PAMF employees have enrollment priority. No on-site parking is available, due to the small parcel. Child care staff parking is accommodated in a city parking structure nearby, and in a future planned apartment building. Short-term parking for parents is provided along street frontages, during 2-hour periods for early morning ‘drop off’ and late afternoon ‘pick up.’ Riverside County The County has leased a 9-acre site, on the grounds of its new Regional Medical Center in Moreno Valley, to a developer who has constructed a child care center, and an Assisted Living center (4 buildings, including Alzheimers’ patient care). An Adult Day Health Care/Day Care Center, a Skilled Nursing facility, and medical office buildings are also planned for the site. The County offered a nominal land lease and $1M of seed funds. The child care center has a licensed capacity of 118 children, ages 2 months to 5 years, including special needs children. Credit: This report is based on research and a draft manuscript for a book to be entitled “Planning for Child Care” by Kristen Anderson.

20

Appendix A

American Planning Association

Policy Guide on the Provision of Child Care

Revised by the APA Legislative & Policy Committee, July, 1997 Adopted by the Chapter Delegate Assembly, September 20, 1997 Ratified by the Board of Directors, September 21, 1997

STATEMENT OF ISSUE and FINDINGS

Affordable, conveniently-located, quality child care is one of the most pressing concerns of contemporary family life. In the 1990’s, 75% of women with school-aged children are in the labor force. According to the Census Bureau, in 1990, there were 19.2 million employed women with children under 15 years old living with them. Their 31 million children must be cared for while their mothers are at worked.

The most rapid increase in the rate of labor force participation since 1970 has been among women with children under the age of three. In 1997, 62% of mothers with pre-schoolers are in the work force. Additionally, most of these mothers work full time.

In 1990, an estimated 1. 6 million children 5 to 14 years old were "latchkey" children, i.e., left unsupervised for at least part of the day. Child care is clearly a national problem calling out for some form of Federal support. In addition, there are numerous state and local level policies and actions which would enhance the provision of quality child care.

In 1990, a common type of arrangement chosen by working parents was family day care homes. It continues to be a preferred choice. Family day care is provided by an adult working in her or his home and typically caring for four to seven children. Local planners can play an important role in facilitating the provision of family day care by working to amend zoning to permit such a use by right in some residential districts. Local planners are also increasing the availability of child care by working with developers to provide affordable space. Child Care in the workplace as another convenient option for working parents.

POLICY POSITIONS

1. APA advocates the inclusion of child care policies as part of local planning policies.

2. APA supports local or state legislation which provides for small child care homes as permitted land uses in all zoning districts, without the standard home occupation restrictions, but with reasonable compatibility standards; and further supports state preemption of local legislation which does not permit this type of child care home.

3. APA encourages communities to consider amending local zoning ordinances to remove obstacles to the provision of regulated group and family child care in all zoning districts, in locations that are appropriate and safe for children.

4 APA encourages communities to negotiate with developers and to offer incentives to provide space for child care in all types of projects, residential, office, mixed use, and commercial, including new construction and reuse.

Reasons for these principles include:

The impact of child care shortages is most acutely felt at the local level. A survey of parents seeking child care in five counties in New York State showed the number one problem to be finding a center which was conveniently located. Many communities are already actively engaged in improving the availability of child care for their residents. For example, in Hartford, Connecticut, developers can receive a FAR bonus in exchange for providing space for day care. Prince George's County, Maryland has amended its zoning to include a special exception for child care facilities in excess public school buildings undergoing adaptive reuse. Palo Alto, California includes in its comprehensive plan a variance permitting expanded site coverage in industrial zones when the additional building space is used for child care. Tucson, Arizona zoning regulations allow by right small child care homes and, conditionally, small child care centers in residential

21

zones. The State of California requires local jurisdictions to classify family day care as a residential use and prohibits the imposition of licenses, fees, or zoning requirements on day care centers with 6 or fewer children. Local jurisdictions may require special use permits for facilities with up to 12 children, but limit local discretion to consideration of spacing, parking, traffic, and noise control, subject to the building meeting state building and fire safety requirements.

It should be noted that, although much attention is being focused on the provision of child care at work, surveys consistently show that most parents prefer that their children be in small facilities close to home. Parents are concerned not just about convenience of child care, but also the quality of child care. Child care for a limited number of children in a home is the preferred choice of many parents. Home occupation restrictions, such as limited use of floor space in the home and prohibitions on the use of outdoor space, unreasonably restrict child care in the home.

Some locations, such as high noise areas near airports and industrial areas with hazardous materials storage, may be inappropriate for child care. In addition, maintaining the quality of life in a neighborhood is important. Traffic and parking, waste disposal, and adequate sound control measures should be considered when providing for child care in a neighborhood. Licensing of child care to assure the quality of care and safety of children should are reasonable requirements.

5. APA supports legislation at the Federal, state and local levels providing for child care needs assessment and planning to be performed at the state and local level.

6. APA supports local legislation (zoning ordinances) which provide for child care in locations convenient to neighborhoods and in public facilities such as schools, recreation and social service centers, and subsidized housing projects. Procedures to locate child care facilities should not be overly burdensome and should be related to size and land use impacts of the facility.

7. APA supports national and state legislation which moves toward the goal of providing adequate funding for safe, convenient and affordable child care opportunities for all children.

Reasons for these principles include:

The United States is the only industrialized nation which provides no job protection or child care support for working parents. American women have no statutory entitlement to job protection, health coverage for themselves and their newborn, or access to affordable, convenient and quality child care. The majority of women (80%, according to the National Commission on Working Women) work in low-paying, low status jobs. Nearly two thirds (63.6%) of all minimum wage earners are women. Twenty percent of mothers in the work force, or over 6 million women, are the sole support of their families. Without public policies in support of parents, we as a society run the risk that many of today's children will not receive the necessary care to grow into productive adults. Regulations which protect the safety of children, enhance the quality of care, or assure child care affordability are appropriate and will help to address concerns of parents and communities about child care.

Child care costs are most burdensome on low-income mothers. Women, especially women of color, are more likely to hold low-wage jobs. Child care costs approximately 27% of the monthly income for a family below poverty in 1991.

Increased zoning barriers add to the cost of child care and the lowering of quality of care. Typically, churches and schools are permitted in residential zones as uses that are compatible with and help support the viability of a neighborhood. Child care centers are usually considered commercial land uses, thus making the cost and convenience of child care greater for neighborhood residents.

Welfare reform’s impact on the need for child care for low-income mothers has the potential to be significant. Public funding for day care (e.g. the provision of safe, affordable, child care at convenient locations) is essential to implementation of any Federal or State program for welfare reform.

* *

Note: The implementation of actions at the state level is at the initiative of the chapter taken in the legislative context particular to each state.

22

Resources Planning Advisory service Report Number 422, Zoning for Child Care, Ann Cibulskis and Marsha Ritzdoft, American Planning Association, 1989.

Bureau of Census, Statistical Briefs: American Women: A Profile (SB/95-19); The Earnings Ladder (SB/94-3RV); Who’s Minding The Kids? (SB/94-5)

Zoning For Family Day Care: Transforming a Stumbling Block Into A Building Block, Abby Cohen, The Planning Commissioner’s Journal, Number 3, March/April 1992. Reference: www.planning.org/policyguides/childcare.htm

23

Appendix B: California Health and Safety Code excerpt re treatment of “Large Family Child Care Homes” 1597.46. All of the following shall apply to large family day care homes: (a) A city, county, or city and county shall not prohibit large family day care homes on lots zoned for single-family dwellings, but shall do one of the following: (1) Classify these homes as a permitted use of residential property for zoning purposes. (2) Grant a non-discretionary permit to use a lot zoned for a single-family dwelling to any large family day care home that complies with local ordinances prescribing reasonable standards, restrictions, and requirements concerning spacing and concentration, traffic control, parking, and noise control relating to such homes, and complies with subdivision (d) and any regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to that subdivision. Any noise standards shall be consistent with local noise ordinances implementing the noise element of the general plan and shall take into consideration the noise level generated by children. The permit issued pursuant to this paragraph shall be granted by the zoning administrator, if any, or if there is no zoning administrator by the person or persons designated by the planning agency to grant such permits, upon the certification without a hearing. (3) Require any large family day care home to apply for a permit to use a lot zoned for single-family dwellings. The zoning administrator, if any, or if there is no zoning administrator, the person or persons designated by the planning agency to handle the use permits shall review and decide the applications. The use permit shall be granted if the large family day care home complies with local ordinances, if any, prescribing reasonable standards, restrictions, and requirements concerning spacing and concentration, traffic control, parking, and noise control relating to such homes, and complies with subdivision (d) and any regulations adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to that subdivision. Any noise standards shall be consistent with local noise ordinances implementing the noise element of the general plan and shall take into consideration the noise levels generated by children. The local government shall process any required permit as economically as possible, and fees charged for review shall not exceed the costs of the review and permit process. Not less than 10 days prior to the date on which the decision will be made on the application, the zoning administrator or person designated to handle such use permits shall give notice of the proposed use by mail or delivery to all owners shown on the last equalized assessment roll as owning real property within a 100 foot radius of the exterior boundaries of the proposed large family day care home. No hearing on the application for a permit issued pursuant to this paragraph shall be held before a decision is made

24

unless a hearing is requested by the applicant or other affected person. The applicant or other affected person may appeal the decision. The appellant shall pay the cost, if any of the appeal. (b) A large family day care home shall not be subject to the provisions of Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code. (c) Use of a single-family dwelling for the purposes of a large family day care home shall not constitute a change of occupancy for purposes of Part 1.5 (commencing with Section 17910) of Division 13 (State Housing Law), or for purposes of local building and fire codes. (d) Large family day care homes shall be considered as single-family residences for the purposes of the State Uniform Building Standards Code and local building and fire codes, except with respect to any additional standards specifically designed to promote the fire and life safety of the children in these homes adopted by the State Fire Marshal pursuant to this subdivision. The State Fire Marshal shall adopt separate building standards specifically relating to the subject of fire and life safety in large family day care homes which shall be published in Title 24 of the California Administrative Code. These standards shall apply uniformly throughout the state and shall include, but not be limited to: (1) the requirement that a large family day care home contain a fire extinguisher or smoke detector device, or both, which meets standards established by the State Fire Marshal; (2) specification as to the number of required exits from the home; and (3) specification as to the floor or floors on which day care may be provided. Enforcement of these provisions shall be in accordance with Sections 13145 and 13146. No city, county, city and county, or district shall adopt or enforce any building ordinance or local rule or regulation relating to the subject of fire and life safety in large family day care homes which is inconsistent with those standards adopted by the State Fire Marshal, except to the extent the building ordinance or local rule or regulation applies to single-family residences in which day care is not provided. (e) No later than April 1, 1984, the State Fire Marshal shall adopt the building standards required in subdivision (d) and any other regulations necessary to implement the provisions of this section.

25

Child Care Zoning

ZONE

PERMITTED USE

(No permit required)

PERFORMANCE

STANDARD PERMIT

CONDITIONAL USE

PERMIT

R1

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

R2R

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

R2

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

R3

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

R4

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

RVC

Child DC Centers

BCD

Child DC Centers

Large Family DCH

BSCD

Child DC Centers

C2

Child DC Centers

Large Family DCH

C3

Child DC Centers

C3-C

Child DC Centers

C4

Child DC Centers

C5

Child DC Centers

C6

Child DC Centers

CM

Child DC Centers

CP

Child DC Centers

CC

M1

LMSD

Child DC Centers

N

Child DC Centers

R-MH

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

OP1

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

OP-

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

OP2

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

OP3

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

OP4

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

R2B

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

R3R

Small Family DCH

Large Family DCH

Child DC Centers

City of Santa Monica Appendix C

R1 Single Family Residential R2R Low Density Duplex District R2 Low Density Multiple Residential District R3 Medium Density Multiple Family Residential District R4 High Density Multiple Family Residential District RVC Residential-Visitor Commercial District BCD Broadway Commercial District BSCD Bayside Commercial District C2 Neighborhood Commercial District C3 Downtown Commercial District C3C Downtown Overlay District C4 Highway Commercial District C5 Special Office Commercial District C6 Boulevard Commercial District CM Main Street Commercial District CP Commercial Professional District CC Civic Center District M1 Industrial Conservation District LMSD Light Manufacturing and Studio District N Neighborhood Commercial Overlay District R-MH Residential Mobile Home Park District OP1 Ocean Park Single Family Residential District OP-Duplex Ocean Park Duplex Residential District OP2 Ocean Park Low Multiple Residential District OP3 Ocean Park Medium Multiple Residential District OP4 Ocean Park Multiple Residential District R2B Low Density Multiple Residential Beach District R3R Medium Density Multiple Family Coastal Residential District

27

South San Francisco General Plan: Child Care Policies Note: Rather than develop a separate Child Care Element, South San Francisco chose to include child care policies in other related elements, as appropriate. General Policies (G) are followed by Implementing Policies (I).

LAND USE ELEMENT 2-G-9 Facilitate development of child care centers and homes in all areas and encourage inclusion of child care centers in non-residential developments. 2-I-12 Undertake comprehensive efforts to promote development of child care facilities. Efforts should include: ♦ permitting childcare centers in all districts; ♦ developing criteria for incentives for childcare facilities, as part of bonuses for specified

TDM programs (Policy 2-I-5); ♦ exploring the feasibility of assisting child care providers and developers to identify and

develop potential sites; and ♦ preparing a childcare start-up guide. TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT 3.4-I-5 (BART Station Area) pg.3-29 & -32 Establish transit-supportive development requirements for the approximately eight-acre station area that include:… * child care facilities.

PARKS, PUBLIC FACILITIES, AND SERVICES ELEMENT 5.1-I-4 Develop new parks in locations and sizes shown on Figure 5-1. (page 5-11) (Employment Areas) Campus Center Park (4 acre site in east of 101, on bayfront at end of East Grand Ave.) Child care mentioned as a facility that should be provided. 5.2-I-1 Work with the SSFUSD on appropriate land uses for school sites no longer needed for educational facilities. Acquire closed school sites for recreation facilities and child care purposes where appropriate. ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT ELEMENT (under Objectives pg. 200) ♦ support quality of life projects, such as child care 6-I-9 Work with hotel establishments in the East of 101 area… proposed Hotel District Program including ♦ joint funding of Conference Center expansion and child care programs to serve hotel

employees

Appendix D