Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 6.1 CreativePlayschlCondUsePmt . . CITY OF DUBLIN AGENDA STATEMENT City Council Meeting Date: July 25, 1995 Appeal of Planning Commission denial. of PA 95"()17, .A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit REPORT PREPARED BY:Jeri Ram, Associate Planner~ SUBJECT: EXHIBITS A'ITACHED: Exhibit A: /Negative Declaration Exhibit B: /Resolution Approving Negative Declaration Exhibit C: /Resolution Approving Conditional Use Permit Exhibit D: ,/ Resolution Denying Conditional Use Permit Attachment 1: Area Location Map/' Attachment 2: Planning Commission Minutes/Resolution ,/ Attachment 3: Letter from Mr. Krekorian to / Planning Commission Attachment 4: Petition / Attachment 5: Letter Appealing Planning CommiSSion / Decision from Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen Attachment 6: Location Map L Attachment 7: Applicant's Written Statement /" Attachment 8: Original and Alternative Site Plans (with/ written description) RECOMMENDATION: /.~ if 1) 2) 3) 4) 5) Open public hearing and hear Staff presentation Take testimony from the Applicant and public Question Staff, Applicant and public Close public hearing and deliberate Options for Action: A. Aclopt Resolutions Approving Negative Declaration (Exhibit B) and Conditional Use Permit (includes Alternative 1 Site Plan) (Exhibit C). or, B. Adopt Resolution Denying Conditional Use Permit (Exhibit D). FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None BACKGROUND: Project Description: A Conditional Use Permit for a day care center in a single family home at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard that will have a maximum student attendance of 30 chi1dtal, ages 2 through 5 years. The Center will operate Monday through Friday from 7:00 A.M. to 6:30 P.M. There will be no residential occup~cy at the site. A Creative Playschool would be in proximity to three schools in the area (Attachment 1). It would, therefore, be convenient for parents with older children attending the neighborhood schools. Additionally, the comer location is beneficial for ~#--~-"""-""'-CC;;ESTO:~ CITY COUNCn.. ST. REPORT e P A 95-017. A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit Land Use/General Plan: The existing land use and zoning districts for the site and surrounding properties. are all single family residential, R-I-B-E. The City's Zoning Ordinance recognizes that daycare facilities in residential areas are compatible with the intent of the var1ou$ residential zoning districts in the City. A day care center in a residential area is consistent with the City's General Plan. Environmental Review: A Negative Declaration has been prepared for the project pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the StateCEQA Guidelines, and the City of Dublin Environmental Guidelines. The Initial Study evaluated issues relating to noise, parking, land use and traffic, among others. It was determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. A copy of the proposed Negative Declaration is attached to this report as Exhibit A. State of California Policy: The legislature of the State of California has adopted laws to encourage child care centers in residential areas. It is a public policy of the State of California to provide child care facilities in the same type of environment as the regular home setting. State law does permit jurisdictions to place conditions to ensure that proposed day care centers in single family residences, with a capacity of7 to 12 children comply with local ordinances. A local jurisdiction cannot deny approval of that classification of child care center unless for some reason it does not comply with local ordinances. Proposed centers in residential areas that exceed 13 children are regulated differently under State law. ,This classification of center can be regulated with a conditional use permit (as is required in DUblin). An explanation of the findings that must be made to approve a conditional use permit in Dublin is set forth below under "City Regulations" . City Reiulations: Section 8-26.2(a) of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance states that a community facility (which inclUdes a daycare facility, Section 8-20.10) may be permitted as a conditional use within the R-l Zoning District. Section 8-94.0 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance states that conditional uses must be analyzed to determine 1) whether or not the use is required by the public need; 2) whether or not the use will be properly related to other land u2leS, transportation and service facilities in the vicinity; 3) whether or not the use will materially affect the health or safety or persons residing or working in the vicinity; and 4) whether or not the use will be contrary to the specific intent clauses or performance standards established for the district in which it is located. Planning Commission Meetini: The Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item on June 19, 1995 (Attachment 2). At the hearing several neighbors spoke in opposition to the project. Mr. Don Krekorian who lives next door to the proposed project submitted a letter to the Planning Commission (Attachment 3). A petition was also submitted opposing the center, signed by 33 people (Attachment 4). Issues discussed by the public included traffic, accident history, noise, parking, child safety and property values. 2 CITY COUNCn.. ST. REPORT e PA 95-017~ A Creative Playschool Conditional Use PeQnit The Planning Commission indicated that their main area of concern was traffic at the intersection of Brighton Drive and Amador Valley Boulevard. They were concerned that the Center would cause congestion and parking problems in the morning as parents dropped their children off at the Center. Several Commissioners indicated that while the use was needed in the City, this was not a good location. The Plannhlg Commissioners unanimously denied the application (Attachment 2). The Applicants, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen, filed an appeal with the City Clerk on June 27, 1995 (Attachment 5). ANALYSIS: Noise: . Staff reviewed the possible noise impacts of this use on the adjacent homeowners. The backyard play area abuts two residences (Attachment 6). The residence to the north at 6842 Brighton Drive faces on Brighton Drive and therefore its side yard would be adjacent the Center's rear yard. The home to the west,at 6849 Amador Valley Boulevard is oriented in the same direction as the Center. Therefore the two backyards are adjacent each other. No other residence wouldabl1t the Center. The Applicants have noted in their written statement that a maximum of ten children, under staff supervision, would be outside playing at a time <Attachment 7). The Applicants have prepared three alternative site plans in response to concerns expressed by neighbors at the Planning Commission Meeting (Attachment 8). On all the Alternatives they have proposed to increase their rear yard fence to 8 feet and plant shrubs along it. This would help to reduce noise and increase the adjacent neighbor's privacy. The Center would be closed during the evening and weekend hours when most homeowners typically enjoy their rear yards. It should be noted that, if the residence was occupied by a family with children, it is likely that the backyard pool area in the evening and weekend hours would be more noisy than the Center. The Applicants plan to fill in the pool and have backyard supervised play dllringthe non-weekend daytime hours. Parking. Traffic and Accidents: At maximum capacity, A Creative Playschool would have a staff of four persons. All staff parking would be provided on site; two within the existing garage and two on the driveway. Additionally, concrete would be poured adjacent the driveway and the path to the house. This would provide for two on site parking .space$ for parents visiting the Center, in addition to the staff parking spaces. A Creative Playschool would be located on a corner lot, at Amador Valley Boulevard and Brighton Drive. Adequate parking exists on the street adjacent the Center; three spaces on Brighton and one space on Amador Valley Boulevard. These spaces are conveniently. located for parents to pick-up or drop-off their ehildren attbe Center. In Alternative Site Plans 1 and 3 the Applicant has provided a walkWay..across the front yard from Brighton to the front door. Staff believes that this revision would make parking along Brighton more viable. Alternative Site Plans 2 and 3 provide for additional on site parking ~ off of Brighton. The Applicants have proposed to construct an additional driveway and parking area in the side rear yard area of their lot.. The City Engineer does not recommend these alternatives because it may create traffic and site distance problems on Brighton with parents backing up into traffic in morning hours. He feels there is adequate parking along Brighton and Amador Valley Boulevard for the Center to operate without causing disruption to the traffic flow. Additionally, since the Zoning Ordinance requires that parking in this location (on-site in the side rear yard) be screened from view, staff does not believe it will be a convenient alternative. 3 CITY COUNCIL ST. REPORT e PA 95-017. A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Pennit Staff evaluated the increase of traffic and parking that would occur at maximum capacity of the daycare center with a "worst case scenario;'. We assumed that there would be thirty cars (no car pooling or parents with two children) arriving between 7:00 A.M. and 8:00 A.M., with 20 of those cars arriving during one 20 minute period. Since there is parking for six cars (on site and on the street adjacent the Center), our analysis found that there are adequate legal parking areas to allow for six cars to park for six minutes at the same time. This would allow for six parents to drop off their children at the same time without parking adjacent any of the neighbors' properties. There have been some complaints from citizens regarding traffic at Amador Valley Boulevard and Brighton Drive, especially during the morning preschool drop off hours. Presently traffic is controlled by a stop sign on Brighton Drive at Amador Valley Boulevard. The City commissioned a study in 1994 to see if the intersection met all-way stop sign warrants. The Study found that the traffic and accident rates at that intersection did not "warrant" an all-way stop sign. Traffic would have to more than double on Brighton before the traffic "warrant" would be met. Additionally, the increased number of traffic trips, would not approach the number of trips required for staff to recommend an additional stop sign on Amador Valley Boulevard. In peak: hours some congestion is visible on Brighton Drive, however, Brighton Drive and Amador Valley Boulevard are within City of Dublin's level of service standard and these roads have enough capacity to handle the traffic. The accident history at this location is as follows: 1. From January 1995 to date no accident has occurred at this location. 2. In 1994, one "rear-end" accident occurred on southbound Brighton Drive (driver fell asleep at the wheel). 3. In 1993, three "right angle" accidents occurred. 4. In 1992, one "right angle" accident occurred at this intersection 5. In 1991, two accidents occurred at this location, one "right angle" and one driver falling asleep and hitting a City street light. In 1987 a fatal accident occurred on Amador Valley Boulevard, west of Village Parkway. This was the last fatal accident to occur in the City of Dublin. In this instance, the driver was under the influence and hit a fixed object. No other car or other person was involved. A traffic study performed for this project determined that the project should contribute $1,490.00 towards future traffic improvements in the area. The Applicant has voluntarily agreed to pay that amount. G:\PJ\95017\mflS-19 4 e e NEGATIVE DECLARATION (Prepared pursuant to city of Dublin Environmental Guidelines, Section 1.7(c), 5.5) project Description: A,request for a licensed davcare center for UP to thirty (30) children between the aqes of 2 years to 5 years, operatinq Mondav throuqh Fridav between 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. Project Location: 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard Name of Proponent: Janet Zupetz, Dawn Bowen I hereby find that the above project will not have a significant effect on the environment. Attached is a copy of the Initial Study ("Environmental Information Form" and "Environmental Checklist") documenting the reasons to support the above finding. ~T.. ignature ~ Laurence L. Tonq Printed Name Planninq Director Title Mav 31,1995 Date Attachments Date Published: Date Posted: Date Notice Mailed: Considered by: On: Action on Negative Declaration: Approved Disapproved Notice of Determination filed: Council Resolution No. EXHIBIT -EL e e INITIAL STUDY (ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM) (Completed pursuant to city of Dublin Environmental Guidelines, section 1.6) APPLICATION NO.: PA 95-017 A Creative Playschool I. BACKGROUND 1. Name, Address and Phone Number of Proponent:_ Janet Zupetz 5525 Old School Road, Pleasanton, CA 94588 Dawn Bowen 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard, Dublin, CA 94568 (510) 248-1686 2. Agency Requiring Checklist: city of Dublin 3 . Name of Proposal, if applicable: A Creative Playschool 4. Description of project: Licensed daycare center for up to thirty (30) children between the aqes of 2 years to 5 years, operatinq Monday throuqh Friday between 7:00 a.m. - 6:30 p.m. II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP~ (See Part III for discu4llon of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 x x x x x x x x x x x 1,3 1. EARTH. will the proposal result in: a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes of geologic substructures? b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or over covering of the soil? x 1,3 c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 1,3 e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition, or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? 2. AIR. will the proposal result in: a. Substantial air emissions of deterioration of ambient air quality? b. The creation of objectionable odors? c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? d. Construction or alteration of a facility within one-fourth of a mile of a school which might emit hazardous air emissions? If Yes, school district must be consulted and must be given written notification of the project not less than 30 days prior to approval of EIR or Negative Declaration (Pub. Res. Code 21151.4) . 3. WATER. will the proposal result in: a. Changes in currents, or the course of direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 -2- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA~ (See Part III for discuAllon of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 x 1,3 b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns or the rate and amount of surface water runoff? x 1,3 c. Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? x 1,3 d. Change in the amount of surface water in any water body? x 1,3 e. Discharge into surface waters, or in any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to, temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? x 1,3 f. Alteration of the direction of rate of flow of ground waters? x 1,3 g. Change in the quantity of ground" waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? x h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 1,3 x 1,3 4. PLANT LIFE. Will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? Introduction of new species of plants in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? 5. ANIMAL LIFE. will the proposal result in: Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 x 1,2,3 a. x 1,2,3 b. x 1,2,3 c. x d. 1,2,3 x 1,2,3 a. -3- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA~ (See Part III for discu4llon of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 x x x 1,2,3 a. b. a. b. land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? x 1,2,3 c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? x 1,2,3 d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 6. NOISE. will the proposal result in: x 1,2 a. Increases in existing noise levels? x 1,2,3 b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? x 1,2,37. LIGHT AND. GLARE. will the proposal produce new light or glare? LAND USE. will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 9. NATURAL RESOURCES. will the proposal result in: Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? Substantial depletion of any non-renewable natural resource? 10. RISK OF UPSET. will the proposal involve: A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 11. POPULATION. will the proposal alter the location, distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population of an area? X 1,2,312. HOUSING. will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? x 1,2,38. x 1,2,3 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 x 1,2,3 x 1,2,3 1,2,3 2 -4- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP~ (See Part III for discu~on of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 x x 13. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. result in: will the proposal x 1,2,3 a. b. c. d. e. f. a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? x 1,2,3 c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation and traffic systems? d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? x 1,3 e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? x 1,2,3 14. PUBLIC SERVICES. will the proposal have an effect upon, or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas? Fire protection? Police protection? Schools? Parks or other recreational facilities? Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ENERGY. will the proposal result in: Other governmental services? a. b. Use of substantial amounts of fuel or energy? Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy? 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 x 1,2,3 x 1,3 x 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 15. 1,2,3 1,2,3 x x x x x -5- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMP~ (See Part III for discu4ltion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 16. UTILITIES. will the proposal result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the follow~ng utilities: x 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 1,2,3 17. 1,3 1,3 1,3 18. x x x x x x x x a. Power or natural gas? b. Communications systems? c. Water? d. Sewer or septic tanks? e. Storm water drainage? f. Solid waste and disposal? HUMAN HEALTH. will the proposal result in: a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health)? b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? AESTHETICS. Will the proposal result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? X 2,3 19. RECREATION. will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? x 20. CULTURAL RESOURCES. 1,2,3 x 1,2,3 x 1,2,3 x 1,2,3 a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? b. will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric, historic, or architecturally significant building, structure, or object? c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d. will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 -6- II. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPA~S (See Part III for discujllon of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 21. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. x 1,2,3 q. Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? x 1,2,3 b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short- term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while long-term impacts will endure well into the future). x 1,2,3 c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact on two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant). x 1,2,3 d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? x 1,2,3 22. EIR REQUIRED BY STATUTE. Does the project involve construction of any facility which burns municipal waste or refuse-derived fuel? NOTE: If the answer is yes, then an EIR must be prepared and certified under Public Resources Code section 21151.2(a) unless subsections (b) and (c) make that section inapplicable. 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 -7- II. ENVIRONMENTAL I~ (See Part III for di~ssion of environmental topics) YES MAYBE NO SOURCE2 III. DISCUSSION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EVALUATION (See attached statement) IV. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initialftevaluation: X I find the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION WILL BE PREPARED. I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that State statute requires that an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT be prepared and certified. ,by Signature I I Associate Planner Title Jeri Ram Printed Name Mav 30,1995 Date (1) Determination based on location of project. (2) Determination based on staff office review. (3) Determination based on field review. (4) Determination based on the City of Dublin General Plan. (5) Determination based on the city of Dublin Zoning Ordinance. (6) Determination based on Specific Plan. (7) Not applicable. (8) finitial.study 2Refer to appropriate note on page 8 -8- e e ISSUES FOUND NOT TO BE SIGNIFICANT The following issues have been found not to be significant as is indicated by a "No" response on the Environmental Checklist. The development will not produce significant adverse impacts for the following reasons: 1. Earth, Water, Plant & Animal Life, and Natural & CUltural Resources: The project is a daycare center that will be located in an existing single family residence in a developed urban area. No new construction or other physical changes that would impact the earth, water, plant and animal life, or natural and cultural resources is anticipated on the project site. Therefore, as noted in the initial study checklist form, under the topic of Earth, items a through g will not be significantly impacted; under the topic of Water, items a through d will not be significantly impacted; under the topic of Plant Life, items a through d will not be significantly impacted; under the topic of Animal Life, items a through d will not be significantly impacted; under the topic of Natural Resources, items a and b will not be significantly impacted; and under the topic qf Cultural Resources, items a through d will not be significantly impacted. 2. Air: It is not anticioated that the project will substantially deteriorate affibient air quality from the additional traffic generated from the daycare center. This is due to the facility's limited hours of operation and staggered time periods in which children are picked-up or dropped-off from the facility. The project will not result in the creation of objectionable odors or the alteration of climatic changes regionally or locally. The project will not involve the emission of hazardous materials into the environment. Therefore, as noted in the initial study checklist form, under this topic, items a through d will not be significantly impacted. 3. Noise: The project will not increase existing noise levels significantly or expose people to severe noise levels. The applicant will not use the single family residential housing unit as a residence and therefore the house will be vacant evenings and weekends. On the weekdays, noise levels are controlled as there will be no more than ten (10) children, under adult supervision, playing outside at any given time. This will minimize any disturbances to residential homes directly adjacent to the daycare center. Therefore, as noted in the initial study checklist form, under this topic, items a and b will not be significantly impacted. 4. Light and Glare: The project will not produce new light or glare. The applicant has indicated that the exterior of the building will retain its residential character as to blend in with the existing residential homes in the neighborhood. No additional external lighting is proposed. e e 5. Land Use: The daycare center will be in an existing single family residential housing unit between the operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday-Friday. The exterior of the house will look like a residential unit. The use will not alter the planned land use of the neighborhood because these uses are permitted to be located in residential neighborhoods with a conditional use permit. 6. Risk of Upset: The project will not involve a risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous materials since no hazardous substances will be on the project site. In addition, the project will not interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans since the project does not physically impact adjacent streets in the event of an emergency. Therefore, as noted in the initial study checklist form, under this topic, items a and b are not significantly impacted. 7. Population: The project will not significantly alter the overall density, location, distribution, or growth rate of the human population in the area. The project will only increase the .number of people in the area between the daycare facility's operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday-Friday. 8. Housing: The project will not significantly impact existing housing or create a demand for additional housing in the area. The project is intended to serve the existing residents in the neighborhood and remain a single family residential housing unit. 9. Transportation/Circulation: The project will not result in significant impacts to the transportation and circulation system from the generation of additional vehicular movement, demand for parking, and modifications to existing traffic systems. The applicant has paid a Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) of $1,490 to fund improvements along Dublin Boulevard, Village Parkway, and Amador Valley Boulevard based on the city of Dublin Capital Improvement Program. Adequate parking is available on Brighton Drive and Amador Valley Boulevard to pick-up or drop-off children. As specified on the site plan, there will be two (2) garage spaces for full-time staff and three (3) parking spaces reserved for part-time staff parking and parent conference parking in the driveway. (See Attachment A) Therefore, in the initial study checklist form, under this topic, there will not be significant impacts under items a through f. 10. Public Services: The project is a daycare center in an existing residential home and will not have an effect upon or create a need for new or altered governmental services in the areas of fire protection, police protection, schools, maintenance of public facilities (including roads), parks or other recreational facilities, or any other governmental services. 11. Energy and utilities: Child daycare centers do not use substantial amounts of fuel or energy. Therefore, the project e e will not increase the demand upon existing sources of energy or require the development of new sources of energy. The project will not result in a need for new systems or substantial alterations to the following utilities: (a) power or natural gas, (b) communication systems, (c) water, (d) sewer or septic tanks, (e) storm water drainage, or (f) solid waste and disposal. This is because the project is a daycare facility, located in an urbanized area, with sufficient utility services to meet the demands resulting from the project. 12. Human Health: Because the project is a daycare facility, it will not create or expose people to any potential health hazards. 13. Aesthetics: The project will not result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public or the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view since the project is located in an existing single family residence and no new construction is involved. 14. Recreation: The project will not result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. The applicant has indicated that recreational activities will take place in the backyard of the daycare center. 7\j 11\ ~ lI\ ~ "" ....... ~ " ~ :-.. '- t , ':.\I\~ .,-~ ~: ... I.N ~ll')-..J ~ .:::::,. ~ i:) ~ ." .;:: ~ r- t;', , ... ''- "- It;' I\:) ~ 'I f". ~ " , . ...... .: ;" 1'. ::: ~ \. - :\ -.,. I' ~ n = ~ -t ':b ~ ~ " ~ ~ .... :-.... ... ..:..~ ~ " \) ~(f\* -= ~ ':;:, " '. :ty ; :::. 't ~""C\ '< ,.... .', (J ''t "f;.,"~ "\ '\ ~ ~ " -" ~. ' ~~ " ~ l~ \.' :;; ::' ,......, l.I w ~ ( ~. '"- ~ ~ '" 'l> '. ':::l .-.2d""-~ ')'4~:J./'.-':::I 0-- T .-1 rC=,vC c- LINt: ~ Co""",cAt'1e ... '" I ~ ..J. ("0,,", ~l) ...... . '" <:'A'eT6' '\)'-'>"'w E'~ ~'" ~l~ 1" f~ __'< ~ "S .... ',,~-,. .....,'t ""i",..c.. QCI ~ \'.. ~:s ) -- ~ > )' ~-' ~ ~ ,~ '" \ (, L- ~ l:~'" w~E IG'- ~ us~:; z i:i'r-.J' ...~ e /06/ I k .- ;/o~. c- o ---'- ~~} I 't \.~ ~ ". ~lb 1" "'"' ,-,'r t \', I :r: <::l ~ v- "\ I.') \.> - ... ~ 'if~'" / ,,!,.,~/( /'/{'///;'Idf/ 9"'/7 ";>;vY.. e f .3&' --1 \ <- ---~ \\1-0 .-c.O ~ 0 . .r- """ ~ z c ~ -l .:c . ,~." e .e R~VISt:<'D --=:-.:....:..: /lOt//? pt/}A/ 6113? I/I7A,tJDI? I/AtlbT 8LvO SCAle I" : 'd ' / ST1)/'r If(//!/J/I/G 1 "\'~"-t- F"n I L Y {lv..... l \0'1" " ~ ~ 'l.1 \J ~ '-tJ ~ JL 1011./6 Ooolt (__S!... '~f I lft 14j ~ "'> "" o ~ I ' - 1 -I I ;J.\ I I I~ Cl. I:: \. ~ ~ IV Ib " ~.~ .l-'l>~ vl\" r ... " II ...", - 10' .,,1 l.- <;.... J ~ ~" ""e~" ~ :l 'l STOvji?, Oouble c,.~ GAfi!AGt=" ?-J. I Oooll. 1 c/lf7 /.A,./oe Co"vr(?l?r[ IJ/?I VCUA) 331 curl') sTReeT p,c \<. n::tvl.t;: Sf ',0 II ~ +.. I L:~ i...~ ~oo /1 ;.. ... ~ .'" ... "i) ':<1 -~ Ie ,:I. 'S;'~ I ~-II-r- f>eJtoOl'1 ~ :;:: ~(IJO""" - - \> I JI WI-OO",,-, Lot--(te1! \)1 S ~~-J .5 /,t>CIVAIK /:I7/1/J':J/ I/A/II!)/ ~ ~ ~ ~ -- 9' ~~ 1!1 N ~ l;:) ~ ~ ~ ~ ,. ~ ~E&EIVED l,d tfi~ t~l~~~ 6Jh 1lI1l1~INPiANNI~' f';PoflJJE/J V.5E tJll;- C~IPt: C~/1..-rt:1? /111 11001'1!:J e e RESOLUTION NO. 95 - A REsoLUTION OF TIlE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- ADOPTING A NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR PA 95-017 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL DA YCARE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT WHEREAS, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen, submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a daycare facility, for a maximum of 30 children, as the primary use within an existing single-family residence in an R-I-B-E, Single Family Residential Combining District, located at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard, and WHEREAS, the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), together with the State guidelines and City environmental regulations require that certain projects be reviewed for environmental impact and that environmental documents be prepared; and WHEREAS, an Initial Study was conducted finding that the project, as proposed, would not have a significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration has been prepared for this application and is on file in the City of Dublin Planning Department; and WHEREAS, the City Council did review and use their independent judgment to consider the Negative Declaration at a public hearing on July 25, 1995; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED TIlA T THE Dublin City Council does hereby find that: A. A Creative Playschool Daycare Conditional Use Permit project will not have a significant effect on the environment based on review of the Initial Study and public testimony. B. The Negative Declaration has been prepared and processed in accordance with State and local environmental laws and guideline regulations. C. The Negative DeClaration is complete and adequate. EXHIBIT l3 e e NOW, TIlEREFORE BE IT FURTIlER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby adopt the Negative Declaration for PA 95-017, A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit Project. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July, 1995. AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk (g:\pa#\ 1995\0 17\NDreso2) e e RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN APPROVING PA 95-017 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL DA YCARE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A DAY CARE FACILITY (COMMUNITY FACILITY) IN AN R-I-B-E, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMBINING DISTRICT AT 6837 AMADOR V ALLEY BOULEVARD WHEREAS, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a daycare facility, for a maximum of 30 children, as the primary use within an existing single-family residence in an R-I-B-E, Single Family Residential Combining District, located at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on June 19, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at the conclusion of a duly noticed public hearing denied said application; and WHEREAS, the Applicants, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen have appealed the decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council; and WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a Negative Declaration has been adopted (City Council Resolution No. ) for this project as it will have no significant effect on the environment; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the application be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find that: A. The operation of the day care facility will serve a public need by providing day care in a residential neighborhood, in a convenient location. EXHIBIT c 1 e e B. The use will be properly related to other land uses and transportation and service facilities in the vicinity, as the Center will maintain the residential character of the residence. A Creative Playschool is located on a corner lot and has convenient parking. A traffic study was performed for the project and the applicants have agreed to contribute their fair share of traffic impact fees. C. The use, under all circumstances and conditions of this particular use, will not materially adversely affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood, as all applicable regulations will be met. D. The use is consistent with the specific intent clauses or performance standards established in the R-I-B-E Zoning District. E. The approval of the Conditional Use Permit will be consistent with the Dublin General Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby conditionally approve P A 95-017 A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit application as generally depicted by materials labeled Exhibit A, stamped approved and on file with the Dublin Planning Department, subject to the following conditions: CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL: Unless stated otherwise. all Conditions of Approval shall be complied with prior to the issuance of building permits or establishment of use. and shall be subiect to Planning Department review and approval. The following codes represent those departments/agencies responsible for monitoring compliance of the conditions of approval. (PL.l Planning. rBl Building. rpOl Police. rpWJ Public Works rADMl Administration/City Attorney. rFIN} Finance. [Fl Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, rDSR) Dublin San Ramon Services District. rCOl Alameda County Department of Environmental Health. 1. This Conditional Use Permit approval for PA 95-017 is to allow the operation of a daycare facility at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard in an R-I-B-E Single Family Residential Combining District. This approval shall generally conform to the plans stamped approved, labeled Exhibit A, consisting of "Alternative No.1 Site Plan" dated June 29,1995, and a "Floor Plan" dated May 30, 1995. [PL] 2. The maximum number of children present at the day care facility at anyone time shall not exceed 30. [PL] 3. The day care shall operate Monday through Friday between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 6:30 p.m. and shall be closed on the weekends. [PL] 2 e e 4. Prior to receiving a business license, the applicant shall make all improvements indicated on the site plan and floor plan, including but not limited to filling in the swimming pool, extension of the driveway, and construction of an additional bathroom. 5. Prior to receiving a business license, the applicant shall make all necessary improvements for an "E" Occupancy in conformance with the Uniform Building Code. 6. Prior to receiving a business license, applicant shall: a. Provide a fire alarm system as per California Code of Regulations Section 3200 and 32004; b. Provide one 2A1OBC Fire Extinguisher; c. Provide smoke detectors in all bedrooms and hallways per the 1991 U.B.C. 7. Children sounds shall be controlled so as not to create a nuisance to the adjoining residential neighborhood. No outside activities may take place before 8:30 a.m. [PL, PO] 8. The operator of the Center shall require that children remain either inside the Center or in the backyard for pickup by their parent or guardian. [PL, PO] 9. There shall be a maximum of 10 children at a time in the backyard of the Center. When children are in the backyard they shall be supervised by a Center employee at all times. 10. Prior to the establishment of this use, the operator shall submit a copy of the State Department of Social Services License Permit for the operation of a day care. [PL] 11. On a continuous basis, the Applicant shall provide the City of Dublin Planning Department with a current day care operating license issued by the State of California Department of Social Services. 12. The day care director shall, at the minimum of a once-a-year basis, make arrangements to have the Dublin Police Services Child Abuse Prevention Program, or an equivalent program approved by Dublin Police Services, presented to the Staff and children attending the facility. A certification of the presentation of such a program shall be presented to the Planning Department on a yearly basis. [PL, PO] 13. This use shall comply with all applicable Planning, Building, Dougherty Regional Fire Authority, Police Department, Dublin San Ramon Services District and State of California Department of Social Services regulations and ordinances. [PL, B, F, PO, DSR] 14. This approval shall be null and void in the event the approved use fails to be established within one year, or ceases to operate for a continuous one-year period. [PL] 15. No further modifications to the site or exterior portion of the residence shall be done without prior review and approval of the Planning Director and must comply with all applicable 3 e e zoning, building code and engineering regulations including issuance of building permits. [PL, B] 16. Any signage on the site shall be subject to the City's Sign Ordinance. [PL] 17. The Applicant shall be responsible for cleanup and disposal of project related trash in order to maintain a clean and litter free site. [PL] 18. Two parking spaces in the existing garage and two parking spaces in the driveway shall be reserved for employee parking. [PL] 19. At any time during the effectiveness of this approval, the approval shall be revocable for cause in accordance with Section 8-90.3 of the Dublin Zoning Ordinance. Any violation of the terms or conditions of this permit shall be subject to citation. [PL] 20. Prior to issuance of building permits, Applicant shall voluntarily pay the traffic improvement funds. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July, 1995. A YES: NOES: ABSENT: Mayor ATTEST: City Clerk (g:pa#\1995\O 17\ccres2) 4 .:; ~ ~ e ALTERNATIVE NO. 1 SITE PLAN e ~ DATED: 6/~9/95 2 r"I ~ I"') '--' " :::! ' .....,,/'1'" l(~ ';;:~Il( ~~ ~", ~~ " 'v ~lO'\"3... ~ t K "' 'I :{, I 'J 41 ~) <;:) ~ ^-. "-'It ~'O ~ . . ~ ~ ... ~ - '<. ~ ~ " - c::. ~ ~ ~ ~\bQ :r < ,~ I- ~ <:: C> ~ " 2 " t ( " ....:. ~ .~ .... - '<:: A~\ ^ ~ ..!. '. \\,~~ ~ '\l" <::. ~ ~, '0: It ~ \1\ BR/6I/TON ~ ...., \ . 1 _.__J:~f. ~ .3'~~~. .-- - .-.-K .>... \( . . '-l" ...., iU:E L./IV&: ..... 1 - 't = ~ .1 ~ w - ~ ~ j ~ '. " .:;; ~ -> \\1 <'\ '^ .. \ I.r, ::s .. ~ 00 <::> \0 Vb. ""'-1 '= :J: ~ '=-:s. . I " ... ...~ ......, ~>- "'- , c; ~~ ct. < ~ ~ <::: 'l: _..eo S c. eo lJJ ~~ J \~ " ..-a. ~ ~ ~ ~~ \-" " ~ t I..:l "" ~ ~~ <>\ ..!l .:>" .", . L: 1-~ ~ c:=: ~ .. I .... 0 .:9-'iJ'.v/"'tf'~ -,.... .! ev,,,,,.-v-;; J - - -"~~ ;7/1//7 _..::7 ;? "'Y?d ~ /r::~~.c. , o ~ 0- I~-, A'r- ....Ill r- ' i'F t I 0;" - >j 1 ~ ~ ~, ~ ,,~O/ 'oJ ! ~ I J... I '.!J ..... ..... " ~ ~ EXHltiiL1L <::> Q ~ ~ ~ ~~ C"" ....... ~ I, .:lo \,; ~ ~'I.I\-- T III v 2- '.ll L- i >- '"" ~ ~ ~ C-- ") --' L- ~ .- ,rf'F e t3 R I fr Hi.:J 1./ '1 ...- S IOC- -E,vc{; '-' 'I I _ t ".. ~ - c . d: \ ~ - ....L'..,~c/:J ~ ~I .., ;:} . ~~ '- . ~ '" --, -Sf 1'- - ,f., - .- --~ i- FLOOR PLAN DATED: 5/~0/95 a~ _"-I 'u ~ -"\ .... ~\, ."1 ~ '.!J t ~ '" v '0 " ~~ ~ '- " <::'? .l.. ~ '" "- " .......~~ S/tJ5 ..,~!-K ;1' : ~... -:-."" ! ~l~ .I. J ~ ..... ~ ~ o ~ ; ...... I .:.,.""_ ~ ~ "0 oook /\ I 1- ..P.l1 ::: ':> :l -0 '" e::> I 1)6"- -":C .nr _ J ~ - ., ..::~ -' .f1 .",- ~~ !b"\ ::J.: '--1 (- ,,~1VII"rl I' "'. rF ,,~.r I I .-L :... I ~ ;:;. __. L- - '> <1 ~ ~:;- \. ~ C ~ ~ <. u. ~ .J>o'h' ... .;OW'.." ~._() I l' -.<.-;-\( T -0 :T -r- _.:7 :? /}/? .:::I ..=7 tJ / >" ~, ~ " ., I 3 s- c -::> ~ " "- 0:g .. -.., ~ T .e '" ^ 1 ("'1-"'" 1 I \ u '\: ~ ~ <. o -..I Iu ->.. '", <;: or l~ M I::l I... ~ "" ~\!>c-\ <:! , '!. ~ "" C) 3 ~ ::. ."c Cl '- -I>< (:) ... ~ ~ ~ <. " ~ 81.:J ,-. \J ..".. ....' 1 c:-O....-. _.- -------;-. EJt!/"';> rj I ;1,att">"'C) c!"J/vP"91 - .--~-,..pC c:::: ~ ...: "'" .... J, '>:l " ~ ';:;. ~ ~ ~ '" t.'- ..... ~ '" I l 1 I I , I ~ ~I ~I 'I ~I I I I 1 i I \ " "- ~ \lJ -. ~ ". v. 'v): e RFSOLUTION NO. e A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DENYING PA 95-017 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL DAYCARE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALWW THE OPERATION OF A DAY CARE FACILITY (COMMUNITY FACn..1TY) IN AN R-I-B-E, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMBINlNG DISTRICT AT 6837 AMADOR V ALLEY BOULEVARD WHEREAS, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a daycare facility, for a maximum of 30 children, as the primary use within an existing single-family residence in an R-I-B-E, Single Family Residential Combining District, located at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on June 19, 1995; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, at the conclusion of a duly noticed public hearing denied said application; and WHEREAS, the Applicants, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen have applied the decision of the Planning Commission to the City Council; and WHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the application be conditionally approved; and WHEREAS, the City Council did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby find that the operation of a day care facility for 30 children at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard will adversely affect the health and safety of persons residing in the vicinity and will be detrimental to the public welfare and injurious to property and improvements in the neighborhood. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin City Council does hereby deny PA 95- 017 A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit application. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 25th day of July, 1995. AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ATTEST: Mayor EXHIBIT D City Clerk e e AREA LOCATION l\1AP , ,r~" ~'..," . " ...../ \~/ , '..... /""'" " '.. / '.' :-':., " '. .'.....\ '\.. . - . ,-~' < . . " ,., .' - ~ . " '\. .-----./ ,. -,\. .. .", .., ('.{/ ; ..--l ("-."'/ v':. .... .'~ '-..:-- ~ __ "" ., . I. - '\.,'./ / --~.'\ ...., ~' '. ,"- . _'0. _ __~ _. ....._,) "."'. -"11. 4, "'... ....~ --... r I ';" . .' ....\ ."",,', -', ..'\ /": .' i / . . . 1 J - . " .-/' .... " " . ..,/ ,",' ,:-- .. -;:..-.. - .-" , . .~/ " '\. '- .., ,"', \."<'~~ \.', .' i-L:......-V .' -, , '. \ . ' / . "',,' , ." "- : ri~---- ~..~~. - ~_.\-- ./.,----' ~(\, > ,,\.""" '\< : ~----: I ,,' ;'\'"""i ....- ,........ \" \T'............,.,. -:>v . ,\',,,/ : L ;-....- -'. '\ \ .\ \: ---------== ........~ } '\. ."" (' . \:., , '\. I I . ~ - --. . ..\ ~ ___~~'.::::=------- ';;.'\ /,. ,'" ',~ . . \. '\ " '\ '.' / : n __---.J '--""1 . ~ ' . '~,,< ,". ,,\ . \."< '\, ,.a, -- . i f----, L....__l I _: r-- '. .-' -' ,. ,-,.' '~<' ~ '\ . .'..."..... \';" : I H Ln"'::;- - -;--'" ''\ ,,~,~ '0''\ ". \....;-....-~i ~/ / / . _ I I " '\. '\ / . ... I -"";~ I 1- --- - , .' "<^' /' " K t--.. ' : '\ ... -"\ /' '\.......--,:' ../ ;........... '-;'---- II x-'.- --- -I .., / ....... ~ ---I i 1_'\.'" ',/ ~'\. ., \,.......'"/"...... -:(' 1: ~--J'--' '\ ''''', '"\ v'/', \' .- , ! i-~L-z--!- ,"vv/ . '" .......","- "\ / ".( .. ! :--~: ~__-!~~~ f.tO,.,.~M " /' 'THE'\:\)"'" ~/ < \",,~ 'I ~d" I ;) I ,i - t.t..tM..... /' f',.. ~TE/\. ~..(-<.\^-:-..1:~l L--:.- ~ I , >:...:>0- . r--'\,. . ~ /"\) ~ 'l1it.....-.... j~- ./'/' ....'~._>:........, ~_.<./../,.,/.;~ ~ I I' ' '. . -{...../ '/'" / I I '!: '! ,: [: _........~//:'... . ~.;/<'~\~'" .~< ,</< ~:-,.::.., . ..'::~ .__c. DO ~ ~ \ '., -' // ( '\ . / . ,. , . /..A r, ,1 ~~C : ~__) :y;~\ .J ;/ \: (,' / .>/.... . . . .~.,../ ''\. ____ ~ . _ -L....i ~- ~ o. .. \ .... ,> . <'" ,.'----- . ."." I"....... ,., L';'. ":.'~".. ~\.,. '.../ ....",~ ./....>. ~ .'.,' ''''..... . )' \~...---- oJ ~ i....., ...;! J _~' ' ... / ,.' / \.'" '.. ""t. . .<....... "'\ ....:: __ ... /_ \. _. ,,- ;, ,,' /..... ,..,..' ,10 . #.. '.. / / _ \ ~' ._~ ~. . ~l" ~. .'~ \ \ .>'". /~V ..' .,'. '\.< .;;. '. '. > ~ ...._ :<(,J ;. I i 0 J. _~ \'-:"/'";\';'. ''\''\ '/'./"':'<./ .') -.{~'\...., '.'~. "-\ ~- . __ o. .. .,.,.... "-., r \./ ~.. ) '\ .. ,\ .,- . ~. )..\~ ....x A~\\ .~\_. .\{'( ~ . ~,// ,/ ~ ,//-"~>.......... ,":<'"'..<":':'~~ ".-::~~\\; ~.:J~'\/>~'Y/' ..(J/ ,</~"..~:..:~),; ..:<. '.:'. . ''\~''--:-'Jj ~ \,..\......;/'\.\..1..,:-../.: " ~...--=( ... ,,,.... \\....Y;::':'.-i \\'~ ... ~ .' /;.\~\...-~..// 'v: ." /'-..).. .. I ';--..( '~,.(, -', /';" '- .F':.....j--. j ~ ~\<.~ ~.-: '. ' /." . '..:<.. .. ..,. / .o{cc~ ~ \-..1...~.:r .-,..Irl '';';'//1 " ,~~..-., '\>/ '<-(;,' /~ '//-, '- i/o...... '... i'~ .~~~ E \ ==J-- /- '~J_" ~'\.' I", '. /:) !^'.' " -....::----...., , :' ' ~ . - ,III J~ I ,IIIII'~ ........... \:' J-' _""'"\, ....,..... -.../ ", ;" : --J :-: III ~ I! I II . \, ".~..... .~.' .. ~ ....... . / ~ ,"- rJ " , I) - "....... .. .. 'l...... . '- ) I . XII/IIII,:I/.~'II/':", ).-' // '.... "......., /~.~~........ '../':' .,': R-I .- -,!:-. " I 'e - I I' I .I" I" """ Y ( ,"r-"'" .... I '" ..., .' I I .. I . II, " \.11"" '. ' v . \.- - / I ...'"'~" , ~ 000 M B 5 A ,-, I ---/ ":'-,111,'1' .1111')/.'../ .... ./<.' , " '. ::> ! ---...Ii ~'"'.. I10/fll/, f'''~.//I,'.I':/""),,, /"'... '. ".;-"'~.." _......-../... ,". , ,----:,..-'- ,)}\,il",I ,".' "..:' /" /..... '-./:', . ,'., ,.,.' ,---..,-_:. I , \..J' I: ,II../::/{,. . L', .." \.... /...... - .' ---.J , , - .' I II.IJ.'/~'~ ../-, .. /"" ,:{',......." / -J I I ,____ tll,l. I "j..;'1', ..../ ... '- :.................i! ' ,,'../' ' ~~.. ~. - '..:...../.... r I .'../, I <' \,~ :-... '\. ...', ......../',.' . ""--- ~ . , , '.'''' ~ . .... .-,... .' / I / : OVft\.11olI MI(iIol;SC~ ATTACHMENT 1 e e RESOLUTION NO. 95 - 027 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COl\fr\.lISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- DENYING PA 95-017 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL DAYCARE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW THE OPERATION OF A DAY CARE FACILITY (COMMUNITY FACILITY) IN AN R-1-B-E, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMBINING DISTRICT AT 6837 AMADOR V ALLEY BOULEVARD WHEREAS, Janet Zupetz and Dawn Bowen submitted an application requesting approval of a Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a daycare facility, for a maximum of 30 children, as the primary use within an existing single-family residence in an R-I-B-E, Single Family Residential Combining District, located at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard; and 'WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on June 19, 1995; and \VHEREAS, proper notice of said public hearing was given in all respects as required by law; and \VHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the application be conditionally approved; and \VHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and consider all said reports, recommendations and testimony herein above set forth and used their independent judgment to evaluate the project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby find that the operation of a day care facility for 30 children at 6837 Amador Valley Boulevard would not benefit the community. The existing circulation problems at the intersection of Brighton Drive and Amador Valley Boulevard would be further compounded by the operation of a day care facility at this location. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby deny PA 95-017 A Creative Playschool Conditional Use Permit application. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 19th day of June, 1995. A YES: Commissioners Zika, Geist, Jennings, Johnson and Lockhart ATTEST: ~~~ Planning Director ATTACHMENT 2- (g:pa#\1995\017\cupres2) e e Regular Meeting -June 19, 1995, A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Monday, June I , 1995, in the Dublin Civic Center Council Chambers. The meeting was called to order at 1.30 by Commissioner lika. * * * * * * * * * * ROLL CALL Present: Commissioners Geist, Jennings, Johnson, Lockhart and lika; Dennis Ca ington, Senior Planner; Jeri Ram, Associate Planner; Sharon Young, Planning Intern, a Gaylene Burkett, Recording Secretary. * * * * * * * * * * PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG Cm. lika led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledo of allegiance to the flag. * * * * * * * * * * ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA The minutes of the May IS, 1995, meeting were appro\' a as submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS None PUBLIC HEARING Sharon Y ouna Planning Intern, presented the staff report. She gave a brief outline for the project. Sh mentioned potential problems, and indicated that Staff recommended approval. She asked for uestions from the Commissioners. Cm. J hnson asked if, in the past, the participants have always stayed the night in RV's in the par ng lot. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 54 June (9, 1995 e e Ms. Lewis answered that security was s if the Applicant was present and if she had any problems s. Young answered that yes they had, and the number and location was subject to revi app val by the Dublin Plaza Shopping Center Merchants Association and the revie\ and approv by the Dublin Planning Department approximately 2 weeks prior to the 'ent. Marietta Lewis, the App ant, was present and answered no sh Conditions of Approval, an strict with them. id not have problems with the her artists because she was very Cm. Lockhart had a question on Con . ion # I I, w .ch stated Police Services indicated they should have private security, did she pIa y the shopping center until about midnight. and asked for qu tions or discussion by the Commissioners. Cm. Lockhart thought the' ad been real good in the past a had never had a problem. ROVING PA 95-012 MARG-ETT ARTS AND CRAFT FAIR CO TDITIONAL SE PERMIT REQUEST TO ALLOW TWO SEP AR.\ TE, FOUR-DAY RTS AND CR.\FTS FAIRS WITHIN THE DUBLIN PLAZA SHOPPING CENTER LO TED AT 7177-7333 REGIONAL STREET Resolution No. 95-019 On motion by Cm. ckhart, seconded by Cm. Geist and with a \ Commission un tmouslyadopted * * * * * * * * SUBJECT 8.2 PA 95-017 A Creative Plavschool - Conditional Use Pennit for a day care center in a single familv home that will have a maximum student attendance of 30 children. ages 2 through 5 Years. The Center will operate Mondav through Friday from 7:00 A.M. to 6:10 P.M. Jeri Ram, Associate Planner presented the staff report. She outlined the Playschool guidelines and hours of operation. She stated that Staff recommended 3 Conditions of Approval for the project relating to noise and child safety. She stated that there had been complaints from citizens concerning traffic along Brighton and Amador Valley Boulevard in the morning hours. She stated a traffic study had been done and that the intersection had not warranted additional traffic lights or stop signs. She pointed out that the Legislature ofthe State of California had adopted laws to encourage childcare facilities in residential neighborhoods. Ms. Ram stated that Staff had recommended the Planning Commission adopt the draft Resolutions approving the Negative Declaration and the Conditional Use Pennit. Cm. Johnson asked how many residences were being used as daycare facilities in residential neighborhoods. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 55 June 19, 1995 e e Ms. Ram referred to a report and stated that there were approximately 22, although centers in churches and schools were grouped into this number. They also vary in size to 0-6, 7-12 and more than 12. Cm. Zika stated that those were only the licensed ones. Cm. Geist asked if there were any as large as this one. Mr. Ram stated that yes there were, and there was one other on that street, My Space to Grow, which was licensed for 25 - 30. She stated that there were maybe 3-4 more, although there were some quite a bit larger, mostly in schools or churches. Cm. Johnson asked if there had ever been any complaints. Ms. Ram stated that in the immediate area there were quite a few day care centers, and within the last 2 years, the Code Compliance Officer had not received any complaints on those centers. Cm. Zika asked if there were any complaints regarding traffic at the other daycares. Ms. Ram stated no, not in that general area; however, at a center in another area there had been one complaint about dropping off and picking up children and that the Code Compliance officer tried to work with the neighbors to resolve the issues. Cm. Zika stated that Condition # 18 concerning the two parking spaces, and the half bath in the garage were concerns of his and that in the past, the Planning De.partment had removed the cars, and turned the space into a play area. If that happened with this project, he wanted it to come back before the Commission for approval. Cm. Lockhart asked if the neighbors were notified of this preschool and was there going to be any slgnage. Ms. Ram stated yes, neighbors were notified and the signs would be limited to the normal residential project signs. Jan Zupetz, the Applicant, gave a presentation to the Commission. She outlined her and her daughters qualifications and philosophy on child care centers. She stated that she had been in the area for 21 years and wanted to provide qualified daycare for the area. She said that they were not applying for a garage conversion, and planned to keep the garage for parking cars. She stated that there is noise already on Amador Valley Boulevard and felt that the center would not add additional noise in the area. She indicated that the outside will remain residential in character. Robert Zupetz, the Applicants' husband spoke. He said they first considered a bath in the garage closet, but decided not to do it, and would still keep the garage a garage. He stated that they would make another parking space in the front for an additional parking space. Cm. Zika asked if it was going to be a residence as well as a day care. Regular Meeting { 6- I 9pc} 56 June 19, 1995 e e The Applicant stated no, the State would not allow it and Community Care Licensing is very strict, and they were not just a baby sitting service, but a qualified daycare center. The property is vacant now and they had just owned it for a couple of months. Cm. Johnson asked if the baths were going to be made handicapped accessible. Mr. Zupetz answered they are working with the City to see what they would have to do. Cm. Jennings asked about parent conferences, when will they be held and where would they park. Ms. Zupetz answered she would set up appointments after school, and they would save one parking space for parent conferences. Cm. Jennings asked if the center would take drop-ins. Ms. Zupetz answered she would not be taking drop-ins. Cm. Geist asked if the size of their staff was based on the number of children in the center. Ms. Zupetz answered yes, Community Care Licensing has a ratio of 12: I with a qualified teacher, or you can have an aide and a teacher with 15 children. Cm. Lockhart asked if they had a State license now. Ms. Zupetz stated they were waiting to get approval first from the City before they could go forward. Cm. Lockhart asked if they bought the property with this purpose in mind. Ms. Zupetz answered yes. Don Krekorian, 6842 Brighton, lived next door to the proposed preschool. He stated he had spoke with Ms. Ram on the project. He stated Ms. Ram was very helpful in explaining the various policies and issues for this project. Mr. Krekorian stated he was opposed to the project for the folIowing reasons: 1) Traffic, the intersection at Brighton and Amador ValIey Boulevard is one of the busiest intersections in the City. It is heavily traveled with the three local schools in the area, and traffic is constant because of the various programs offered at these three schools. Because of this heavy traffic, cars can be backed up to approximately 10 houses. (He presented photos of the traffic); 2) Safety, he gave an example ofa little boy being hit on the busy street on June 15; 3) Noise, he stated he worked from his home in the back bedroom, and presented pictures showing where his office was in his home. He asked who would monitor the 10 children in the backyard; and, 4) Property value, he purposely did not purchase a house next to a school and did not want to live near one. Mr. Krekorian offered more photos and a letter to Mr. Tong with signatures from many neighbors who opposed the project. Cm. Jennings asked what age child was hit. Mr. Krekorian answered a 4th grader. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regular Meeting { 6-1 9pc} 57 June 19, 1995 e e Cm. Jennings asked the Applicants if there were any plans to heighten the fence The Applicants stated if the CC and R'.s allowed, it she would do it. Cm. Jennings asked if once the pool was removed, would there be enough room to plant shrubs. Ms. Zupetz stated that there would be enough room. Mr. Krekorian stated he thought that there could only be an 6 foot fence in the City of Dublin. Cm. Zika stated that you could get a variance for an 8 foot fence, and asked what bedroom Mr. Krekorian worked in. Mr. Krekorian stated bedroom # I on the drawing. Greg Blake, 7192 Newcastle Lane, opposed the project at that particular location. He stated that there was too much traffic in the area already and that he thought it would be a dangerous situation. He stated his wife worked nights and slept during the days, and would be affected by the daycare center in that location. Allen Ownes, 6802 Amador Valley Blvd., stated that there was a daycare right across the street from him and he had witnessed the traffic effect with a smaller number of kids. He stated that there was a lot going on at one time during certain periods of the day. He felt that 12 kids, as in the day care across the street, were enough, and that 30 kids at the proposed daycare would be too much. He felt that people would be stopping traffic to tl)' to wait for people to pull out while waiting to drop off their kids. He stated at a previous City Council meeting there was discussion on raising the speed limit on Amador Valley Boulevard, and residents were feeling the need to organize and draw the line on traffic issues. He stated that he understood that the Applicants had bought the place for solely using it for this business, and he felt that was presumptl}ous without the proper approval first. The residents were there first as homeowners, and although there was a need for daycare, there are real issues, such as property values, traffic concerns and safety issues that needs to be weighed against the need for a daycare at this location. Leonard DeStefano, 6825 Amador Valley Boulevard, was opposed to the project, and he felt when he approached Mr. Zupetz as a new neighbor, he was not honest on his intentions on what he was going to do with the property. A couple days later, he received a notice in the mail for the proposed daycare. Mr. DeStefano stated he worked nights and purposely bought a house away from a school so that he could sleep days. He stated that when he first bought his home, the homeowners were told that Amador Valley Boulevard would end at Stagecoach and that was not true. He told of one neighbor who was building bunkbeds and would put one out for sale, and soon the City came by and told him he could not run a business out of his home and Mr. DeStefano felt the daycare was no different. It was a business out of the home. He stated that traffic was a large issue, and cars could be left outside idling, unattended, which could cause toxic fumes in the air. He asked the Commission to soul search, and would they be comfortable with this type of business next to them. The only option that he could think of would be for the Applicant to lease or purchase a space in a commercial area or a large school. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 58 June 19, 1995 e e James Key, 6848 Brighton Drive, shared the concerns of the previous speakers. His concerns were for the safety for the children. His home would be directly impacted by the drop-off of students. He felt that when the home would be empty, there would be the potential for crime. He felt it would be a prime target with commercial equipment in the residence. He strongly felt it would negatively impact the propertY values and he would not have chosen to live in that home had their been such a business like a daycare at that time. Angeline Fountain, 6980 Doreen Court, was opposed to the project. She stated that she is often in the area and had seen some of the parents dropping off their kids at Fredricksen School, and although traffic was an issue, the children would be subject to loud noise, profanity, fast cars and she felt it would not be a good environment for the children mentally, and they would be emotionally abused in this situation. Betsy Key, 6848 Brighton Drive, was opposed to the project. She agreed with the previous speakers, and questioned the traffic survey of the area, Her main concern was for the safety of the children. From the other daycare center at 6801 Amador Valley Boulevard, she has seen one adult with a trail of children walking down that busy street, and she shudders at two year olds walking down that street and felt that could happen with the proposed daycare also. Dawn Bowen, co-Applicant, stated she would never allow the children out on the corner or walking down the street. She felt that home centers had a bad reputation, and she would be running a quality daycare and the children could hardly speak at that age, and that the noise level would not be a problem. Ms. Zupetz welcomed the neighbors to approach her directly if there was a noise problem. Ms. Bo\\'en stated that the center would be quiet for approximately 3 hours from 12 -3 while children were eating and taking a nap. Mr. Zupetz addressed the issues of the noise and he felt that it would not disturb sleep and that the street was already busy and noisy. He stated that they were not doing anything with the garage, and he never represented any thing to anybody. Cm. Zika stated that the Commission takes everybody at face value. Mr. Zupetz stated that they were willing to place an 8-foot fence with shrubs along the fence line to lessen the noise to the neighbors. Mr. Carrington stated the Commission had the option to permit up to a 12-foot fence. Cm. Jennings asked the Applicants if they had purchased the property with the contingency that they get a CUP approval. Was that in the contract? Ms. Zupetz stated no. They looked at many properties and talked with the other daycare centers in the area, and felt this was the perfect location and that there was a need. Cm. Jennings asked if they knew how long it took for the other daycare's to reach their maximum number of children. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 59 June 19, 1995 e e Ms. Zupetz stated she did not know. Mr. Zupetz stated that they talked with My Space to Grow and there was a garage conversion at that site. Ms. Bowen stated there was a need for quality daycare and she wanted to do what was best for children. Cm. Geist asked Staff how big My Space to Grow was. Ms. Ram stated 20 or 25. Ms. Ram clarified that 680 I Amador Valley Boulevard was Matilda's daycare with 12 children and was a different center than My Space to Grow. Randy Zugnoni, 6854 Brighton Drive, was opposed to the project, and although the noise would not affect him, he stated that they had no control over the parents dropping off kids during the day and where they would park. He felt with tw<? busy streets, there would be too many uncontrolled situations. Ms. Zupetz stated that they could state in a parent hand book that parents be concerned over parking and drop-off issues. Cm. Zika stated that no matter what action the Planning Commission took, it could be appealed. Ms. Ram stated that any decision taken by the Commission could be appealed within 10 days. Cm. Johnson asked Staff about traffic issues, and why they did not indicate that there would be a traffic issue. Mr. Thompson, Director of Public Works, addressed the traffic issues. He stated that the traffic study done in January gave the number of 800-11 00 every hour and 30 more would not effect traffic that much more. Cm. Jennings asked what streets were included in that count. Mr. Thompson stated that was a count for all three streets approaching that intersection. Cm. Jennings stated most concerns were for parking and dropping kids off, could there be other options, like have someone out there to get the children signed in and out and then escort the children into the facility. Mr. Zupetz stated that there was more than one parking space in front of the property. Mr. Thompson stated you could fit two parking spaces if you parked in front of the driveway. But there were two more on the Brighton side. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 60 June 19, 1995 e e Mr. Krekorian asked that the Planning Commission take a look and survey other daycare facilities in town, and note that most people drop their kids off before 8:00 because they have to be at work by 8:00. Cm. Zika closed the public hearing. Cm. Lockhart stated he had been involved in dropping offkids at daycare facilities, and parking was a problem. Cm. Zika stated he was concerned over dropping off kids, and felt there was too much traffic in that area. He felt that there were no mitigating factors that address traffic concerns. Cm. Lockhart stated although there was a need for daycare in the area, he felt that this was not a good location. Cm. Johnson asked Staff if there were any daycare that had closed in the City within the last year. Mr. Carrington stated that he did not know of any. Cm. Jennings stated she was more concerned about traffic, and less with the noise level. She said she was impressed with the opposition against the daycare. She tended to agree with the traffic concerns, and was concerned that the Applicants purchased the home first without the proper approvals. Cm. Geist asked the Applicants if they did not have a license now, how long would it take to get one. The Applicant stated they would have to get the facility ready, have every stick of furniture in place, fill the pool, and Community Care Licensing does not come out until the very end, and it takes approximately 2-3 months Cm. Zika asked if as individuals, they were properly licensed. The Applicants stated yes. Cm. Johnson asked what could be done to help with the traffic situation. Mr. Thompson stated there was one stop sign on Brighton and one at Penn. Cm. Johnson stated he had received two tickets for going 30 mph and felt the area was regularly patrolled. Mr. Thompson stated that putting in a stop sign when the warrants were not met causes accidents because people tend to run those stop signs. Cm. Johnson asked if there would be a pick up lane in front of the house. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 61 June 19, 1995 e e Mr. Thompson stated there was only enough room for a bike lane, and traffic lane, but not a drop-off and pick-up lane. The Planning Commission had a discussion on the traffic issues. Mr. Thompson stated that the center could direct parents to drop kids off on Brighton and not on Amador Valley Boulevard. Cm. Zika stated that he dropped his grandchild off in a cul-de-sac and people park two or three deep and that's with no traffic. A motion was made by Cm. Jennings to approve the project. Motion died for lack of a 2nd. On motion by Cm. Geist, seconded by Cm. Lockhart, and with a vote of 5-0, the Planning Commission unanimously denied PA 95-017 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ADA Y CARE CENTER IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT WILL HAVE A MAXIMUM STUDENT ATTENDANCE OF 30 CHILDREN, AGES 2 THROUGH 5 YEARS. Cm. Zika stated the Applicant had 10 days to appeal to City Council. Cm. Z'. stated that the redecking at the swim center was done in 1990 and di do again. Does the contractor have any liability. Cm. Zika declared a 5 minute recess. Regular Meeting {6-19pc} 62 June 19, 1995 e ~Q~ chJ\~& -l0 ~l0 \\l\..l~\4,( e June 19,1995 Planning Commission City Of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, Ca. 94568 Dear Commission Members, My name is Don Krekorian and I reside at 6842 Brighton Dr.. On June 2, 1995, I received a Notice Of Public Review, Project: PA 95-017 A Creative Playschool. After reviewing this notice, I came down to City Hall and discussed this issue with your Associate Planner, Jeri Ram. Ms. Ram was very informative and explained a number of issues regarding the request for a Conditional Use Permit at 6837 Amador Valley Blvd.. Ms. Ram explained the different levels regarding day care/preschool regulations: 1-6 children - no permit required. 7-12 children - which I understand to be an Administrative Permit 13 children & on - The Conditional Use Permit. Ms. Ram also provided me with a copy of the Negative Declaration Report, which have reviewed. My presence here before you this evening is prompted by a number of reasons and issues. My residence at 6842 Brighton is next door to 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. I would like to let you know that I am opposed to this Permit because of the following: 1. Traffic The intersection of Amador Valley Blvd. and Brighton Dr. is one of the busier residential intersections in the city. This area is one of the most heavily traveled areas because of the locations of schools supporting the student body, Dublin High, Wells Intermediate, and Fredriksen Elementary. Starting at 7am and continuing through the day, the traffic is constant. This is because of the split programs that are offered at the 3 local schools. Frederiksen Elementary offers an early bird/late bird program which students can start at 8:30am and end at 1 :50pm, or start at 9:30am and end at 2:50pm. Similar programs are offer to the Intermediate and High School students. A IT ACHMENT 3 e e Because of this heavy traffic, cars can be backed up, on Brighton, from Amador Valley to Tamarack, which is approximately 10 houses and most residents have a difficult time pulling out from their driveways safely. 2. Safety: The addition of this preschool at its proposed location will create even more of a problem than we currently have. Because of the traffic conditions that exist, if we compound this intersection with any more cars we are asking for trouble, injury and possible death. I have taking photographs of this intersection and as you see traffic can back up quickly. Driver are using the curb lane as a right turn lane, while drivers are waiting to turn left from Brighton on to Amador Valley Blvd. We also must take into consideration the ages of the children 2 to 5 years of age. Because of current traffic conditions the location of this proposed day care or play school and the age of the children, we as community must protect them and this is not a good location for a playschool. 3. Noise I am currently employed by a company based in South San Francisco and my employer allows me to work from home Monday afternoons, Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday and Friday mornings. As shown in the floor plan of my residence, I work in bedroom #1 which is towards the front on the house and the window is only 9'4" from the fence, which is the back fence of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd.. I have also taken photos from the bedrooms #1 and 2, and of my side yard. As you can see I look directly into the back yard of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. Although the proposal for the playschool states that no more than 10 children will be out at one time, how and who is going to regulate this. I have 2 children and I know how loud they can play. 10 children or more will be too noisy and will interfere with my working ability. 4. Property Value: I have purchased my home to be in a residential area, not next to a school. If I wanted to live near a school, I would have bought one near or across from a school. No study has been submitted regarding this issue and I feel that the city should supply the surrounding residents of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. with a complete review regarding this issue. If the value of the surrounding homes go down not only do the residents lose, but so does the city. Taxes! e e I [lave also talked with the neighbors of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd., and of 45 households, 28 are opposed to this request of a Conditional Use Permit. Attached is copy a letter to Mr. Laurence Tong, as well as a petition signed by the residents who are opposed to the Planning Commission granting this permit. Based upon the issues I have addressed, I as well as 28 of my neighbors, request that the Planning Commission deny the permit. Thank You, Don Krekorian 6842 Brighton Dublin, CA. 94568 e e rlcor DI ~ r"'l _ ,.:;.;:;...1 ') t::~ rl.--rl .t.''':r- Cl~.. I Il.....l I _V-L- I::::} :.._11 _ -~-N Brighton Dr. I Sidevv'alk i ~, Front Yard I ,......""1,....11 ::'0 Q I L:'~',--'I I I I t -- I .1 - - Garage I ~""'''l- I ;'.I;~-' I I aLI'_1 :-; "'11 l~ : , HC,C1m I Side 1'Jor I - I I ! Side Yard I Dining Rm I 8s.jroom I Yard I ~1' , .- Hall,;vay ~ ~- -.,. Family Room 9'4" :', & Kitchen Guest Bath Bedroom " #2 D&W I Bedroom Patio Master Bedroon ':';"1'"'\ ;...) l-- alh w w W Back Yard . Bedroom #1 is used as Office Space Monday afternoon. all day Tuesday. Vvednesday. Thursday and Friday afternoon. Dark lines on exterior indicates windm,'1s and doors. ! e H~~\.~ ~ fD i)0 (all~L~ e June 19, 1995 Mr. Laurence L. Tong Planning Director City Of Dublin 100 Civic Plaza Dublin, Ca. 94568 Re: Project PA 95-017 A Creative Playschool located at 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. Dear Mr Tong, Attached is a list of Dublin residents that are opposed, to the City Of Dublin's, Planning Commission grant of a Conditional Use Permit for a day care center in a single family home, located at 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. The house located at the corners of Amador Valley Blvd. & Brighton Dr., and at one of the busiest residential intersections in the city. We have reviewed the traffic conditions, saftey and noise factors, since the Notice of Public Review was mailed out, on May 30, 1995, and strongly request that this Planning Permit Not be granted. We request that this letter and the names attached be included in the Planning Commision file on this issue. Regards, The Neighbors of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. cc: Guy Houston - Mayor Dennis H. Carrington - Senior Planner Carol R. Cirelli - Senior Planner Ralph Kachadourian - Asst. Planner Jeri Ram - Associate Planner Neighbors of 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. ATTACHMENT '-/ e e Peiiiion Opposing The City Of Dublin, Planning Commision Granting a Conditional Use Permit for a day care center in a single family home located at 6837 Amador Valley. Blvd., Dublin, Ca. ~ame Address p \2mLJ~.EE~~~____~~-Bfj~J:fT~ k2R.__~~~"'L__ a<<l{)IJA _??1 / ~7rc:__~&5"~~/ ~ 117Z!:lP~,-i2fL~/1l___ -12!f~ j'~ _ 'v11.~__~li--'L___~_----2____~~~__ _r;~_~-.k.~____-.:J.' q L~-' '0 j nu~__--12'_U2.'~__ ~X--,.+----.?Lil #~~ -t..M-~L5L-- ?-I~-.-L ~ ~~-~~~ ~ - ~-- 4~-b-_ /.. (~hf~ ~, -;-,--j)~!zaJy:, --- ~ . ~ ~ . . #~~ I #it&~-----:-~/7 __. . , " ~~__rr..1L~CQ..sLh:.Ll..n:______R~.J:i-tb-__ __~ I-Ja-.,{- "" f-, L. \-i---"l ct~) c.c ~ ~ -I l:s-S \"-L V-..J \-J -.i (\. Lw '- 0~.' '\ ( niL?\' C i -; I :"(;J ~ \~/1"'tl,.\-f 1;- I rl ') Ji"L( /} -ij~__- -~--------12 ~~~- ~ ~---- ~ _ ~_-( tttJ __~Ll tZcS(fA. c ______-11-011 ___ =t?fr~Q[~~K., 7c1~-g- Ue\lJCJ!S~ ArJ ~b {)J____ ~\C-K fi1-TR.lc:..K 2~~~l!:!.g~rLL 1-1'-- D~___ ~..QA r\...-+--1~~~\~~~&.L-.Kc-', (}'l.h~~L?LL-__J2~ 10 . ---,G"QL~ll.L -PE:'Sr~~i:Yz? ~t~~~~_ yuJo lICL__ _?:i-fLt!.d.!{.;LJ) " M00z..!JL..Y!J ":!.4LZL1..i'M,M<ie LJ,~Y..df;!:Ji:.-- J~ --1..::LL~ (),.JL IlLJ ..12:____ ~.-.~ -,,' 'I' ~ -g2L~~~=C:;~it^'"--'-- ( , ...)..~ --G~.J'. Arncdx- \Io1I-r--c E!-:---~:;::--- ~~. ~ -f,e-- --;..- r1~;!:1 (, ~=== /- g'D z. ftma.tUv l!. B( ud i:u bLL..- . - ~~-/7 C?4rP1~JI -;;L~4//-:--== . ~~__~-]&& A"'!J:f2mUJ..ft&+l!?I~" !:::>vb::J--,-~ ____ ____b &-~..tJ:M..~~~.~_(2L () .D-----P-J)~ L/ !!.__ _~~--__--~~~ 't:'~~_____i~jyI~~ ____ ~~t;~ _-'J.tqD """Ans/J::p-~~ I)c.-. b//ri 2. .____-.-7J1() ~/_'l:tL~L____~~____ . ~ {.,,7 fa /' _.L, (/LPL .,.<n -.J ~ ~.: '>- '-1-~~~-=o-~------~----- r'P '- ~ ".' ~&'"~~-l.If~~-==- '~"-" ~_~~~ _J~__l.__~_~_ ~ i) ROSITA CT BRIGHTOi\! DR. ~ e i'JE\:VCASTLE DR. . I w , o o . . ~. " . . o o o ':.':~l~) '. ." ," '. ", " ;. ',: . . . . " '. " :.... . . . . . . . . .... ..... ....:...:...:...:... :.'.:.'.:,'.:,'.:.'.:.',:.'.:.', ,', . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. . . . i\! 0 i\!7~ ~. 0 0 0 N 0 N u i\! 0 0 0 o N o . .. . . . . . . . . '. '.' ..... '.' .'. . . . . .. ... o 0 x o o e 0 : 0 : : : 0 0 () i\! N 0 N f\J : + Arv'lADOR VALLEY BLVD. x - 6837 Amador Valley Blvd 0- OPPOSED N - NOT AVAiLABLE OR i\JO COMMENT 28 Househoids - 62% 17 Households - 38% e RECEIVED JUN 2 7 1995 CITY ut- uuBLlN e Janet A. Zupetz 5525 Old School Road Pleasanton, CA 94588 Kay Keck, City Clerk Dublin, CA 94568 APPEAL Rl:;'. ..... Planning Application PA 95-017 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL - 6837 Amador Valley Blvd., Dublin Conditional Use Permit We, Janet A. Zupetz and Dawn R. Bowen do hereby "APPEAL" the decision made on June 19, 1995 by the Planning Commission not to approve the Conditional Use Permit for "A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL" a quality day care center. Our appeal is based on the following: 1. A neRative declaration was issued hereby stating that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment as stated in EXHIBIT B. 2. Apparently the planning commission completely ignored the expert testimony of the City's Senior planning and traffic staff as to regard to a completely neRative environmental impact study; furthermore, the traffic engineering department testified that any traffic impact from the day care center is not measurable. Furthermore, the commission apparently was not concerned with a desperate need in the community for "quality" day care nor were they concerned with the merit of the project with regard to Public Policy of the State of California to encourage child care centers in residential areas. The above are only some of the issues involved. We ask that the Public Hearing for the above be held on July 25, 1995. Please do not send the notice of Public Hearing (Certified) to me, I will pick it up when I return on July 23. Please send a copy of the notice of Public Hearing to my Attorney: Ralph D. Hughes, Attorney at Law 4471 Stoneridge Drive Pleasanton, CA 94588 cc: Ralph D. Hughes A IT ACUMENT ."."".". ~ e e LOCATION MAP BRIGHTON DRIVE enl (Jt '" o;r-i c:.1 c.. I L.") '':>, , 10 ' ~ ...""""" t>- . 1 I r j ~l , t'- I { c..~ . /j ,/ ~ "t} Ii , " r /:~ 1 ~~ r' ~'i '~r~ ~" ; ~' ~ ' ~,...... ' /~g~ ':- Eo< :~ (~, y(" ., - ~..,. a: ~ / .-r.., J , ~ .\ Ci ""'.Y~',"'(' '0'; . - o ... .. U ~' .' ~ Z Cl. '" ~ ;'R' ;:: :~ Q .., "} ~ t." 10e: 1 i j. j~. . , /..;.. :-:. I~ ~ ."'~ .~~ l.~" ~~r ,... A CREATIVE . ~ 68~7 It ~ , PLAYSCHOOL I ~ . I > ~ ~ i6849 ~ ~ \\ 0 ~ > ~ ~ i ~ < .- ~ a: 851 ~ < 687 I I I ~i ~ I " \\ I I I J I i I I I L ATTACHMENT" e e CITY OF DUBLIN CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PROPOSED DAY CARE CENTER - "A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL" 4. We are proposing to open a Licensed Day Care Center for thirty children, ages 2 years to 5 years (Pre-Kindergarten). Hours of operation are 7:00 a.m.to 6:30 p.m., Monday - Friday. We will offer a Pre-school program as part of the Day Care Center activities. We will be serving breakfast, lunch and 2 snacks of well balanced meals according to the laws set forth by the State. Our children will have interesting age appropriate activities incorporating inside learning time and supervised outdoor play activities. There will be approximately 1 1/2 - 2 1/2 hours of rest time when the school will become very inactive so the children will be able to have sufficient rest time. There is no reason for this center to cause any disturbance to the peace of the neighborhood; as the children will be well cared for and supervised. Also, it is very rare that 30 children will be outside at the same time. For example I 10 two year olds will be playing outdoors for 1/2 hour, they will go in for a quiet activity; then 10 three year olds will have outside play for a 1/2 hour: finally 10 four year olds will use the play yard for a 1/2 hour. Ten well supervised children will certainly not pose a noise problem in the large yard area. The facility will essentially EC~IVE~ A IT ACUMENT",~ 1 j1)~5~~ be vacant on w~nds except for normal cI~ing, etc. a. There is a definite need for "quality child day care" in the Tri-Valley area. The center "My Space to Grow" which is located near the intersection of Amador Valley Blvd. and Village Parkway is full with a waiting list. Also, Tots University, on Oxbow Lane, is full with a waiting list. As we become filled we are planning to hire ROP students from Dublin High School to work as aides in our center, further enhancing service to this community. We are also planning for the children to do special community outreach projects like recycling, food and clothing drives for needy families, singing for senior citizens in Dublin and San Ramon Senior Centers. b. The use is properly related to other land uses and transportation service facilities in the area because Amador Valley Blvd. is a convenient connecting Boulevard to businesses and freeways. There are many schools in the nearby area; Elementary, Middle School, High School, and a Montesorri School. Although "6837" will be used for a Child Care Center, the outside will still retain "residential character" to blend with the existing residential homes and will not be offensive to the neighborhood.We are definately improving the existing structure adding a new roof and gutters, repairing the existing broken-down fence, removing the obtrusive and illegally placed metal storage shed from the premises, and painting the ex4lt tor of the entire house. 4It will pruning and planting new shrubs on Brighton as to add be to the attractiveness, class and value of the neighborhood. If the Center is approved, the in-ground swimming pool will be removed, adding to the peacefulness of the existing neighborhood not to mention conservation of valuable water resources. c. The use will not materially affect the health or safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity. Ha ppy , safe, well cared for children can only add to the well being and character of the neighborhood. d. The use will not be contrary to the specific intent clasues or performance standards established by the district as "6837" will still maintain it's residential character as a home, and therefore provide a home away from home for young children and a much needed service for responsible working parents. Other information: The Child Care Center "A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL" for 30 children will require about 2 full time employees and 2 part-time employees, (more or less depending on enrollment).The full-time employees are the mother & daughter (owners). The hours of operation will be 7:00 a.m. to 6:30 p.m., Monday - Friday. The children are dropped off and picked up at various times throughout the day as not to affect the traffic flow. Wi th the already existing schools in the neighborhood and the traffic flow on Amador Valley, the traffic from our center will be negligiable. AlS~ lote, the speed limit illt on Amador Valley Boulevard. miles per hour Although we are applying for permission to serve 30 children, if we are granted such, remember it will take time for our center to reach full capacity and when and if it does; not all children are in attendance every day. The facility will be essentially be vacant after the hours of 6:30 p.m. during the weekdays and will sit quietly Saturday, Sunday and holidays when working folks do their entertaining and outdoor relaxation and sleeping in on the weekend. The elimination of the swimming pool will certainly eliminate noise problems during the day, evenings and especially weekends and holidays of the hot summer for the surrounding neighbors. Also, be advised that Community Care Licensing needs to approve the Center and strict guidelines with their inspections must be followed, as set forth by the State of California, before they will grant a license for child care. They will be going over this Center with a fine toothed comb before approving it for children. :c l- ~ o ~ ~ , - d:. ..J 0- ~. :;!::a> ~ >o~ _l~< ...U' Vcr: :~~ Iv I- I!) -1 t!: ~ ?J (., o "'--"", ~\:.~ ~~~ ~~~ ~, I ~ I..!l ^- ~\C)1 ~ ~ 'S. .l..( " ' ~\6~ ._ ___.___~I/Io?<6'O"< 'NC,: L./NC: ~ ~ " ':lo J..... '-lJ " ~ ~ ... ~ ~ ~ ~ '~ ~ ~c. ,>> ? Cl "" '^ ~ 1 "- .....-- :~ ....'11 Ir- ,&E' L " I I BRIGI/TON ~ IU '" ~ o :r 0Cl <::: J " " - <'\ '-"l c. ....l.~ ..0 Yb l-1.~."'rI ~ ~ ~ "'e- ~~5 "",s,'i" L ~ ';~Q S ~ ~ ~ ~~ ,.J <... - '11 ~~ \j "" ~ - g,. ",,<:>":.~ e'~ i l'~Q: ..c tv/""Cl".J -,.... ev.,ltI"......,OJ ~ ..::7/)//7 _-=' .?/)'?::/ --...L ~,I"(; '1',<' \~ ~ <>\ 1: ~ o ~ t Y::--,A'r- / Or. - ';>j I ,,~o/ '> ATTACHMENT ~ -t::. '" ":. .... ~ ~ 1 1 M ""l '-' ~ -:.. '-l " ;"- '-~ ';,J ~ ~" -.l ~ ~ "- " 'J ~ ~) \ 'l: i.\,) I, ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "- Vj lJ V) '> \.lJ ~ ~ ~ " ~ .)... 1J.l ..,J .... " :) ~ Q ~ ~ ~ lll~ C'... ..... ~" ~ \,;~ ~""- , -- June 29, 1995 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. - Dublin, CA. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES TO ORIGINAL SUBMISSION Alternative 1 - Preferred Original plus the following changes: 1. Create a Brighton Street side alternative entrance. Install concrete walkway, East to West, from front door landing to Brighton sidewalk, with proper slopes and other requirements. This gives 2 different street entrance alternatives. 2. Make rear fence 8 feet high. ~. Plant shrubs across back fence line as practical. To the extent that the neighbors house borders the fence. iM'CEIVE 0 JUH J 0 1995 '\rJ811N PI A ~. . '-"J '1NIA:~,r , - June 29, 1995 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. - Dublin, CA. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES TO ORIGINAL SUBMISSION Alternative 2 Original plus the following changes: 1. Create a Brighton Street side primary entrance. Install a walkway from Brighton sidewalk to side of house. Install a door in the side of the house to use as a primary entrance. Walkway, to be properly sloped and landings as necessary: 2. Y~ke rear fence 8 feet high. 3. Plant shrubs across back fence line as practical to the extent that the neighbors house borders the fence. 4. Y~ke a 2 car concrete off street parking area in North East corner of lot. Move fence as needed. Install proper curb entrance from street. 5. Move entire Brighton side fence closer to sidewalk. Install gate with alarm as primary entrance to the new walkway to the new side door. , - June 29, 1995 A CREATIVE PLAYSCHOOL 6837 Amador Valley Blvd. - Dublin, CA. PROPOSED ALTERNATIVES TO ORIGINAL SUBMISSION Alternative 3 Original plus the following changes: 1. Create a Brighton Street side alternative entrance. Install concrete walkway, East to West, from front door landing to Brighton sidewalk, with proper slopes and other requirements. This gives 2 different street entrance alternatives. 2. Make rear fence 8 feet high. 3. Plant shrubs across back fence line as practical. To the extent that the neighbors house borders the fence. 4. Make a 2 car concrete off-street parking area in Northeast corner of lot. Move fence as needed. Install proper curb entrance from street. O~~~I~ ~ ",,()~ ::~ C> ::):1<""> ~~ ~ "- .... ~ " ~: , ..... i ~ ! ~- '- I ,...I ~ I \.. , I 1:: , I ~ '-...... ~I <. : - ";', ~i . I ~ . I ~ ~ I ~ -; "'I - ~ ~ M ,., '-' ~ " '! -, ;' "... '.. .:It . \J ".. .~ " ~ " ~ ...... "- .... '-J 'JI "'-... .....'::1 \ -" "- , ~ 'oU I...... ~ >-.,../\'" ~"\::.~ ~ " '" ~\J'v ~V\~ :{, ~ ~ >-... '-:l\()~ ~ " <>. .\.r ~"- ~ ~~~ 3 ~< 2. <:: ~ ~ " :t , " ) ....:, ~ " ~ .? ~ ~. ...... ~ S. \1- r ~~.. ..) .$ . --;''0 ....... l\ '^ J'> "" ~ -~ ~ \.l"",,, 0:::. ~, ...., ~ ~ V\ ll. 1 -\ 1 , ~ ~ ....., ~ ~ '-4 ....., ...... "t ~ ~ ~ ';: ... ~ "4 ~ . ~ ":t .~ 1::: ~ 0 ~ '^ ....... "'I Cl W " . " \f) '> \..u ~ BRiel/TON _._ __'v.~ .J,~~t:_ .-.--,s- ~ ~ '" ~ \\1 .1'\ :::s <::> ~ ~ \ I ,~ ..... t>\ ~ 'l.. o ~ ;7/V17 y,:-, A'.- t ~ ' t?E' )j 1 /Or- t:::J ~ -...J ~ J.. '.1,) -.I .... ~ I I v 70/ " ~ ~ <::> ~ ~ ~ ';::. ~~ C' ... ""I ~ I, .:>0 ,,~ '-l:I""-- , r:-6 , ~ I ~ ~ "'I " v- ~ ~ I -... '" \1"- ...... -~ C\ ~ { ~~ ~ k. ~ :r l-- ~ '0 2. < ~ "" -, " '- \Xl \\ - .1 ~ ~ ,;::;' S\ ~ 1~ ~~ ~ '<::. "-!. ~ "<i..: ~ ~~ \t I ~ '" tt f- ,t?{ l I 1 ,\\ ~ 1: ~ o -.> ~ I ~ "" ~ ""\\ Yb .'.~#"'r[ ::.~ ~ ..... ~ ~~2 ~~_ (!' < 0 ~, \J,~i ''I:~~ ..." ""~-%, !"\c.. ~ ~'';, ." i "'I ~ -v.,,,,,..,,OJ ~, /t:'"~~.( >- ~ ..... ~ ~ ..... -- .~ -.~) <; ~ --....'~ ::1'" ~- 8RI61~_,,,, \ \ I <\ '-'l \\1 '" ~ o ~ ~7/}/1 7 t I OT> - '/~O/ -- ""-,A>r- >j I ~, ! Cl ~ -..J ~ ,).", '.lJ '-' ..... S , ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "- 00 "'l 0:: W . >- \J) '> \...u ~ d C- Ln-7"Z Q -- c:njZ ...O~ ==~o ~C"") =~ .:s .. 4. . ~ ." " .;; "'-.J'I", ~l:(~ ~~~ ~ ~':i.. :{, Q ~ ^- \0'01 ~ '" ... ...... ~'" ~ -\{~.:\, ~\6~ .~ <t " ~ --%' ~ M ""l '-' ~ " ~ , I , " " ..~ '~ " " .~ ~ '"' ~ ...:. ~ '< 'J 'J.I "''\, <:-.~ ~ ;'-'t i.ij' k.. ~ t::) ~ -..J ~ j,.,. 1.1) ...... ..... '" :) ~ ~ ~ ~ <;::, ~~ C"-.... "" ~ I, .:loo I.,;~ 'S:I""-. -;:.- '- t:t-~~ ",- en Z 0- ;;3 ::' Cl~ :::t: r-~ ...~~ tJt.~~ '- "- ~ ~ n. -C , . . - 1 '" ,..., t") '--' IV\ ~ ., ..', ,,' ...... . .'. "\. ...... ...... ',lJ " " ~ v \.. '" ~'='\':l-.. :{. C) -.l ^- ':l::~ ~ ..... ':, ~~~ ~\6~ " , .' .. ~':.. ~: I", ......d' ... , ~ :- .~ t\ ~ I ~'O ~ ) ;::, 'I;: .l ~ '( ~ I ....! ." :. ~ '" ... '" ~ .J '.... ~ ';t ~ \~ "t ~~ {~ :i ~ ~ ........... ,/ ~ ...... VI ! ~ ~ ~~ t c~~_.__~ ~ '. ..-) if' '.)l .' ~ 1 , ~ ~ /'~:'~;''D {" J ....' ~t ..,,} (~ s- "I ..... I ~ 'Jl., ,,' ~ ~::s '-'1. Yb ""._~...rI ~ "1 1 l[ ~h ~ ~~ ~ ~ ~ ~~o ~ ~ ~ ..:s " . \,J c;.. - "" ~:l . t..J" rl'\~-lL ) "" .C) ~Q"~ :- '---. On _ oJ i 1 : ~ O)JIb',,,,,,,G;J __, I'" K. / 'C ~r.<. ~ ~ ~ ~.... ~ " .... G:. \ ~. " -.. ~ " ':> ?>N ~ "- "<: 1:::: ''<..I 'l::. \...... '-I <0 '1) " W ! , \0 , \n '> \.JJ k' BPiv//i.)!./ .J/~~A'IC ~ -... .- .r- J'o.'" ..:::."'- ~-S' ~, I ~i ~ i I . " ;;.. ~ \ I .~ "~ '" ..... I" <!l' ~ 3 :~ c;. ':l: c- 't-~ _ .__ C .:5'.I~"V/""'(P-J -> .:7/V/ 7 K --,,.p~_. f-- ,cf? F --4-----t or. -' >j " I ~! ..)1 .... ...., - ~ /~o/ ~ '':'' -J - " :'\ ,. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ c-- .... r" ~ " :"\., \.,;... ~"":.....