HomeMy WebLinkAbout6.1 Munchkin-Care DayCtr CITY CLERK
AGENDA STATEMENT
CITY COUNCIL MEETING DATE: July 20, '1999
SUBJECT: Public Hearing: PA 99-014, appeal of Planning Commission denial of Munchkin-
Care Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit for a child day care center for 30
children. (Report Prepared by: Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner/Zoning
Administrator) '~
ATTACHMENTS: 1) Project Site Plan
2) Applicant's written statement
3) Planning Commission minutes from June 22, 1999 meeting
4) Planning Commission Resolution denying Conditional Use Permit
5) Letter from NNS Associates :
6) Letter from Marjory Gibson
7) Amended Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan
8) Amended Munchkin Care Parking and Driving Safety Agreement
9) Letter from Staphanie Tackett
10) Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Perea
11) Letter fi'om Mrl and Mrs. Misra
12) Letter from Martha Ketchum and Marilyn Irwin
13) Letter from the Board of Director oftheSil~ergate Highlands Association
14) Letter from Elizabeth Kilbum
15) Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Sebastiani
16) Letter from Lisa'Dettenrieder
17) Letter from Sethuraman Ravi
18) Letter from Sangita Srinivasa
19) Email from Mr. and Mrs. Goss
20) Letter from Mr. and Mrs. Jamar
21) Letter from Child Care Links
COPIES TO: Jay and Susan Krishna
Marjory Gibson
PA 99r014 File,
Internal Distribu~iqn
ITEM NO, 6,I
RECOMMENDATION: 1) Open public hearing
2) Receive staff preseniatiOn and PUblic testimony
3) Close public hearing'and deliberate
~ ~k(~~ 4) Options for action:
/ A. Direct Staffto prepare a resolution sustaining Planning COmmission
decision to deny the COnditional Use Permit for day care center for
30 children
B. Direct Staff.to prepare a resolution reversing Planning commission
decision and granting a Conditional~Use'Permit for a Day Care
Center for 30 children and to prepare a resolUtion adopting a
Negative Declaration for the project
'C. Direct Staff to prepare a resolution reversing Planning Commission
decision and granting a Conditional Use permit for a Day Care
Center for 20 children and to prepare a resolution adopting a
Negative DeclaratiOn'for~the project
FINANCIAL STATEMENT: None
DESCRIPTION: ' '
This is an appeal of the decision of the Planning Co~ission to'deny a Conditional Use Permit for a Day
care Center for 30 children located at 11586 Ale~eDrive. ~The day care center would operate from 7:00 a.m. ,,~
until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. The Applicants WOUld haVe to move OUt of the residenc~ if~.eir
request for 30 children is granted due to space requirements of the State Department of Social Services. Sue
Krishna and two employees would operate the facility. 'onebfthe children in the facility belongs to the
Applicants and three to the emploYees, resulting in space for twenty:six additional children.
The Applicants in their appeal letter (Attachment 2) and the letter outlining the appeal from their attorney,
Marjory Gibson (Attachment 6), did not provide reasons and ground~ for why the'Day chre Center for 30 children
should be approved on appeal. 'Those letters did ProVide rea~0ns and groUnds for why a Day care cent~-/'Or 20
children could be approved instead.
The task of the City Council is to decide if the dedlsi0ri 0fth&'Pl~g C0~ission to deny the prop0sed'~
Day Care Center for 30 children should be sustained or not. Th/ee option~ are: (1) The CityCouncil coUlddeCide
that the Planning Commission be Sustained and that the center should not be expanded beyond the existing 1
children. (2) The City Council could overturn the'Pl~ri~g'co~ission deCisibfi~d appro9e a DaY care Center''
for 30 children. (3) The City Council cOuld decide that the Planning C0~ssi0n decision be reversed subject t° a
limit of 20 children.
BACKGROUN-D: . , ~ '
The Applicants, Jay and Susan KriShna} establiihed the M~dhkin c'a~e,Small Family Day Care Home
for 6 children in' SePtember 1994. The Pl~in~g C$~i~Ssi°n permitted the expansibii 0i'this facility from a ~
Small Family Day Care Home for 6 children to a Large Family Day Care Home for 12 Children On February 24,
2
1998. An existing Large Family Day care-Home-for'i2 Children is currently being Operated at this site. On
April 28, 1999, the Krishna's applied for a COnditional Use Permit to operate a Day Care Center for 30 children.
The facility would be the primary use within an existing single family residence in the PD (Planned
Development) Zoning District (R-1 underlying zoning with a 7,000 square foot lot size) at 11586 Alegre Drive.
PLANNING COMMISSION 'ACTION:
The Planning Commission voted 4 - 0 - I to deny the Conditional Use Permit. The Minutes from their
meeting are in Attachment 3. The main concerns of the Planning Commission were as follows:
· Parking. The Applicants represented in their application that 6 parking spaces exist in front of the
garage for use by parents when they drop-offtheir Children. The parking spaces would consist of
two rows of tandem (front to back) spaces. There is not sufficient space to park two vehicles front to
back without a vehicle blocking the sidewalk and a portion of the street. Further, tandem parking is
only allowed by thez6ning Ordinance'pursUani~t0~a~c0ndition~l use P~i~t for large commercial
and industrial parking areas, and therefore is not allowed in residential areas. Proposed parking of
Applicant and of parents of school-age children on Amarillo Road may not be possible during school
hours at Nielsen Elementary School.' On street Parking on Alegre Drive is constrained becaUse it is a
cul-de-sac. Adequate parking may not be available if the staff is increased due to State requirements.
· Traffic impacts at the end of a cul-de-sac. The Commission was also concerned about periodic
congestion at the end ora cul-de-sac when several vehicles converge on the center at the same time
I"-' to drop off children. This Could be dangerous and lead tO parking on neighBOr'S driveways.
· Adequate staff to allow f6i:Sii-ffi~i'&-tii~/0vVi~/:a-~i~'~hii~'~a ~i~iffiiii~-~bei. i~Sc~i:/S'~ehiidi:eii¥i~'~Niel~%~ .............
School. If three staff'members are required by the State for the 'school, the absence of one of the
staff to escort children to Nielsen School would leave the school short-handed.
· Commercial use in a residential area~ Piing Co~issioners were concerned that a Day Care
Center for 30 children in a single-family home that is no longer occupied by its owners would have a
commercial aspect that would be inconsistent with a residential area on a cul-de-sac.
ANALYSIS:
Noise Impacts:
Children's noise. Staff vi sited the site and determined that noise impacts of children to surrounding
residences would be minimal. Children ar~urrehily
Townhouses located to the 'west are ten to fifteenfeet'higher'than the day care center'and are separated from the
center by two fences and approximatel~/'~en-ty'~f~i~'Sf'iSiS~i~i~' Tfi~'~adjh~rit'-h0m~'~to-the'~6hth on Alegre
Drive would have few noise impacts because the yard/play area for the day care facility is located to the rear of
the Krishna residence. The adjacent home to the east on Alegre has its yard (with children's play equipment)
facing the day care facility so noise impacts Should be minimized. An adjacent lot to the north on Ladera Court
should not be impacted because it is ten to twenty feetlower th~-the 10t-ibc center is located on and because of
the diStance (hpProximately seventy-five feet) from that residence.to the day care facility.
If the City C0~cil chooses to grant the appeal, Staff would pi:0pose inclusion of conditions of ~iPp?°gai
in the resolution of approval that limit 'the hOurs of operation of the day care Center from 7:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
neighborhood. A further condition would require that no outside aCtivities shall take place before 3:00 p.m.
staffhas receiVed a letter from Mr. and Mi:§~Pei:e~i"(At/~iahmentqo) indicating their concerns that furore
expansion would give rise to increased children's pla3' noise.
Traffic Noise. The City has received letters fromthe neighbors 0n'either side of the proposed DaY Care
Center. Mr2 and Mrs. perea, oWners of the home tO the south of the center are concerned about increased nOise
levels due to added vehicular traffic, the drop-off/pick-up of children and the added number of children outside2
Mr. And Mrs. Misra, owners of the home to the north of the center, wrote a letter (Attachment 11) stating that
they feel that noise has increased since the center was~Ch~ged from caring for 6 children to 12 childreni Staff iS
concerned that traffic noise woUld be intenSe for brief interdals if sever:al vehicles arrived at the same time tO
deliver children: If trips are staggered dUrin~e~ d36iS:dff period fr6m' 7:15 a.m. to 9!00 a.m. ahd'the 'piCk:iip'
period from 4:30 p.m. until 6:00 P.m. traffic nOiSe Co,id 'bb minimized/
Traffic Impacts. Department of Public Works staff determined that traffic impacts of the center would
be minimal, that no traffic study be prepared, and that~ nO'traffic impact fee is required. Alegre Drive is a cul-de-
sac witha design speed of 25 M.P.H. and Should easilY carry the approximately30 trips during the morning and
evening hours withoUt Conflicts with residential traffic.~ Ho~e~e'r; if the facility is expanded t° 30 children,I
staff is concerned aboUt brief periOds When Several Vehicles arrive at the same time causing episodes of
congestion. If the facility is expanded to 20~bhildren ~idditional traffic impacts would be minimized because, of
the eight additional Children cared for, four would be school age children who arrive at a differentfime~than..~
pre~schOolers who are dropped-off by parents on their way to work. Staff was also concerned about occa~io~fl
speeding on Alegre Drive by parents who are ina hurry. Staff 0bserved the property from 8:00 a.m. until 9:00
a.m. on June 17, 1999. Seven Vehicles dropped-off children during that hour. No traffic conflicts or speeding
were observed.
In their letter the Pereas are concerned about two traffic issues: that traffic would be increased
considerably if not doubled; and speeding byh~d-isa~nts-~a-hsing safety hazards for neighborhood Children~
The Misras are concerned about speeding as Well and are also concerned about traffic conflicts by parents
backing out of the center.
parking. The Zoning OrdinanCe requires the following parking for day care center~!' one Parking space
for each employee, one parking space for each company car Plus al°ading space for every five children. Three
garaged parking spaces are available for the Applicants and Staff' (if One former garage Parking space is
converted back to a garage). The center has a driveway that is wide enough for three parking spaces. One on-
street parking space is available in front of the house for-&0p-0ff. This arrangement does not meet the~
requirements of the Parking Relations for a Day ~c~e c~nfer roi 3'0 Children but does. meet the requir~men;/~
for 20 children. As stated above, Staff is concerned ab°tit brief periods when several Vehic!es. ~.arri've at~.._t,h..~ame
time. At such times all close-in parking may be occupied leading some parents'Who are in a hurry to use
adjacent private driveways. Staff observed that up to three vehicles drOpped-off children at one time. Two
occupied driveway spaces and one parked on the street. The average time taken to drop off a child was 6
f-" minutes. A facility for 20 children would have minimal additional impacts to parking whereas a facility for 30
children could have potentially severe impacts. The Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan discussed below was
proposed by the applicant to ad&ess staff and neighbor concerns.
Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan. NNS Associates submitted a letter (Attachment 5) outlining a
Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan that addresses the issues of Parking, Traffic Safety and Noise. The main
points of the program are as follows: .....
Parking
· Change drop-offperiod of Period from 7:15'a.m. - 9:00 a.m. to 7:00 a.m.- 9:30 a.m.
· Limit the time a person could occupy a parking space to 10 minutes in the driveway.
· Applicant and day care center staff would park on Amarillo Drive.
Parents would be required to wait until a driveway space is open before they enter Alegre Drive.
· Agreement between the center and its customers not to park in adjacent driveways, on the street, wait
outside the cul-de-sac until a driveway Space is vacant, and not park for more than 10 minutes in the
driveway, with provision for fines for violations.
Traffic Safety
· Parents of school age children park on Amarillo Drive.
· Parents agree to adhere to posted speed limits.
Noise
· Gate entry would be left open during drop-off and pick-up hours (if allowed by State regulations) to
eliminate gate slamming noises that bother neighbors.
· Outdoor activities of the children would be limited to the hours of 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
If the City Council chooses to grant the appeal, Staff would propose inclusion of conditions of approval
in the resolution of approval that implement the main provisions of the Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan such
as: drop-off and pick-up times; the prohibition of staff, applicant and parents of school-age children parking on
Alegre Drive; and addressing the gate noise. The proposed agreement between the center and its customers is
not implementable by the City and would have little real value if not enforced by the Applicants.
REQUEST BY APPLICANTS TO MODIFY PROJECT:
The Applicants in their apPeal letter; through their representative and in conversation .wi,'.~,S.~g~,bgye.
proposed that the project be modified to a Day Care Center as follows: · The maximum number of children would be 20 qtfi!&.en.
· Delete an activity area that was previously converted from a garage parking space to restore the parldng
space in the garage. This would result in three garaged parking spaces and provide one space per staff
member (if the total staff number does not exceed, three).
· To add outside playtime from 9:00 a.m. to 10:00 a.m. in addition to the 0u~side play time hours
originally proposed from 3:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m.
· The Applicants propose to live in the day care center as modified.
· An amended Parking and Traffic Mitigation Plan is proposed (Attachment 7) that would require
conversion of a current playroom area occupying a former garage area back to a garage, use the m
entry to the house rather than a side gate for the center.entrance, and a requirement that parents
school-age children park -ih ~sP0t~' 6the~'il:i~'~he dr[i;~x~a~'and 5-6nt
children to the center.
· An amended Parking and Driving safety Agi%em'ent (A~i~efii"g).
Licensing. A condition of approval 'is inclfid~d-~hich requires that pi:i6r'/0'ei~lSiii~nt 6f'th~'h}e'~ih~
operator shall submit a copy of the State Department 0f's6cial"s~rgi~e§~Lid~rise P~it ~foi~
Day Care Facility. Another condition of approval'reqUires that on a dontinuing ~basis-} the'Applieant~tiall
provide the City of Dublin Department of CommUnity Development With current day care operating Ii~fises '
issued by the Stat'e Of California Department Of S6~i~il'S'~ices~
Letter froTM the Board of Directors of the Silvergate Highlands A. ss0eiati0n.
The City has received a copy of a letter from Tom' B'~tZ; Mana~'~r'6f th~"Silvergat~Highlan~s
Association, to Mr. and Mrs. Krishna informing them that th~ governing'documents of the homeowners
association state that each residence shall be used solely for residential purposes
The City of DUblin'is not a party to the governing documents of homeowner's aSsociations. The
prohibition of certaifi 'land uses by siich"dO~i/m'~fi~"'i~'~ Ci';¢ii'in~t/~i: b'~fi th~'¥e~-idefii~dfthe
ENVIRONMENT~REVIEW
A Negative Declaration has been prepared for'the isr0ject pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA), the state CEQAGiiid~'iii:i~"~d ~ ci~'6fIsiilSlifiEn;cii-6~nial'Guldelir/es~ Ttie
Initial Study evaluated'i~s'ue'~'r~laiing io lan'd i~ie'~d' ~i'~i:ig;~ p6pfii~iti6fi ahd' hOiiSin~; ge61ogic i~roblems
water, air quality, transportation/circUlation, biological,' eh~i:gy"~d mineral and cultural resources, hazards,
public services, utilities and serVices systems, aesthefcs;' ~1 i:ecreation2~'It wai'dete~ned-tt/ai
project will not have a significant effect'On fihe
GENERAL PLAN )~nND ZONING
The proposed Day Care Center would be consistent with the Single Family Residential deSignation of
AGENCY REVIEw
This project has been renewed by other cit~'~O~l~i)~ei~t~· and~iht~i:~if'&a-'/i~i/~i~'~;~'~d'ffi~ii~' i6~fii~ .........
have been incorporated as conditions of approval in~'the draft R~01uti0~ ..........
6
RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the City Council open the public hearing, receive staff presentation and public testimony,
close the public hearing and deliberate, and either:
Option 1. Direct Staffto prepare a resolution sustaining Planning Commission decision to deny the
Conditional Use permi~ for 'day'~ ~n~ei~ f6r 30 children;
Option 2. Direct Staffto prepare a resolution reversing Planning Commission decision and granting a
Conditional Use Permit for a Day Care Center for 30 children and to prepare a resolution
adopting a Negative Declaration for the project; or
Option 3. Direct Staffto prepare a resolution reversing Planning Commission decision and ~anting a
Conditional Use Permit for a Day Care Center for 20 children with appropriate conditions
and to prepare a resolution adopting a Negative Declaration for the project
G:\pa99014/ccappeal
N
PLAN MUNCHKI~ [~AnE ' HOME I)AY CAnE , Z..., ~1 ........ "" .......... "'"""'" ' ..... "*"~' ' ............ --- '" "'"
RECEIVED
Sue Kdshna
11586 Alegre bdve JUN 8 1999
Dublin, CA 94568
CiTY OF DUBLiI
June 28, 1999 ~
Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
My name is Sue Krishna, and I am the resident and owner of Munchkin Care at 11586 Alegre Drive.
This letter is with regard to my appeal from denial of PA 99-014 Munchkin Care Day Care Center
Conditional Use Permit Application.
I started Munchkin Care a few years ago after working as a pre-school teacher as well as completing
coursework in early childhood development. I am currently pursuing a certificate program in early
childhood development. I love working with small children and am happy to be able to offer such an
important service to society. My satisfaction is derived from seeing children happy in a fun and
educational setting in'the formative years of their lives, while their parents pursue their chosen
professions. I am equally happy when parents become more than customers to me as friends feeling
comfortable in the fact their children are well cared for during the day.
In addition to providing a much-needed and important service to the community, I feel proud of being
able to assist my staff with the child care of their children at no cost to them or the State of California.
Offering high quality Child care is a difficult task for care-givers. Child' care is an issue of national
importance today, and I hope I and licensed and qualified care-givers like me can receive the
necessary community support so that we may offer our services in an affordable manner. Otherwise,
the shortage of quality child care will only get worse, and society as a whole will suffer.
I have amended my application for expansion to only 20 children and have requested Ms. Marjory F.
Gibson to prepare and present my appeal. I believe I have addressed all of the public concerns raised
to date and sincerely request the council to hear and approve my appeal so that I may continue
providing this valuable service to the community..
Sincerely,
Sue Kdshna
Enclosures:
1. Ms. Marjory Gibson's letter of appeal.
'-
2. Ms. Stephanie Tackett's letter.
3,
Munchkin
Care
Pa~ing
and
Ddving
Safety
Agreement.
4. Adicles SuppoSing need for child~re in the community.
2A regular meeting of the City of Dublin Planning Commission was held on Tuesday, June 22, 1999, in the Dublin Civic
~enter City Council Chambers. Chairperson Jennings called the meeting to order at 7:08.
ROLL CALL
Present: Commissioners, Jennings, Johnson, Hughes, and Musser, Eddie Peabody Jr., Community Development Director;
Dennis Carrington, Sr. Planner; Buzz Kalkowski, Code Enforcement Officer; and Gaylene Burkett, ReCOrding Secretary.
Rich Ambrose, City Manager was present for the first public hearing.
Absent: Cm. Oravetz
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG
Cm. Jennings led the Commission, Staff, and those present in the pledge of allegiance to the flag.
The minutes from the June 8, 1999 were approved as submitted.
ADDITIONS OR REVISIONS TO THE AGENDA - None
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATION - None
PUBLIC HEARING-
Mr. Peabody stated there was a letter to the Planning Commission from the school district and staffwould draft a letter to
respond to the school district letter.
8.1 1998-2003 Capital Improvement Program Update
Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report.
Mr. Ambrose, City Manager presented the staff report. He stated that last year the Planning Commission determined that the
projects in the 1998-2003 Capital Improvement Program were in conformity with the General Plan. He explained that every
other year the City prePares a new 5-year document; this year is in between and the City is preparing an update to that
document. In accordance with the Government Code, the Planning Commission's role at looking at the Public Works
projects is to determine whether they are in conformance with the General Plan. The staff report has identified the projects
~/,~.~ in the Capital Improvement program last year. He stated that he would be happy to answer any questions.
Cm. Jennings asked if the Commission's job is to make sure that all of the issues in the Capital ImprOvement Program are
within the General Plan guidelines.
Mr. Ambrose stated yes, the Public Works projects that are to be built within the fiscal year.
Cm. Jennings asked if the air conditioning for the Civic Center is one of the items under the Capital Improvement Program.
Mr. Ambrose explained that there is a building replacement fund for all major building components which is not part of the
Capital Improvement Program.
Cm. Jennings commended staff, on an excellent job in preparing the CIP update. She asked if there were any questions from
the Commission, hearing none she closed the public hearing.
On motion by Cm. Hughes, seconded by Cm. Johnson, and with a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Oravetz absent, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 99-23
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNI2NG COM/VIISSION OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
FIN"DING THAT TIlE 1998-2003 CAPITAL I1VI~RO~NT PLAN (CI~) UPDATE
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN IS CONSISTENT WITH ~
ADOPTED CITY OF DUBLIN GENERAL PLAN
8.2 Tri-Valley SPCA, Conditional Use Permit, Site Development Review and Development Agreement to be ~
continued to the July 27, 1999 Planning Commission meeting.
On motion by Cm. Hughes, seconded by Cm. Musser, and with a vote of 4-0-1, with Cm. Oravetz absent, the Tri-Valley
SPCA was continued to the July 27, 1999 meeting.
8.3 PA 99-022 Loretta's Hair Salon/Massage Establishment Request for Conditional Use Permit to establish a
Massage Establishment Message Establishment in a 1200 square foot existing tenant space at 7417 Amador Valley
Boulevard.
Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report.
Buzz Kalkowski presented the staff report. He gave a brief description of the project. He stated the project is located at 7417
Amador Valley Blvd. He stated this was an established business and explained how the massage establishment worked. He
stated the CUP required a police permit and a masseurs permit. A public notice was sent out to the surrounding businesses
and residents. He stated that the City departments of Building, Fire, Police, Zoning and Public Works reviewed the
application and did not have any issues or concerns. The Police Department gave the establishment a verbal approval on
their permit. He stated staffrecommends approval of this project subject to the conditions attached to the staff report.
Cm. Hughes asked if the Police Department requires a formal approval before the Commission can approve the project.
Mr. Kalkowski said there are actuaIly two permits issued; one is a CUP from the Planning Department and the other is
masseurs permit from the Police Department.
Planning Commission 76 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
~ Ir. Peabody explained that the Commission needs to approve the use before the Police Department issues the actual permit.
.e stated that the applicant and staff have talked to the Police Department.
Mr. Kalkowski stated that one of the conditions in the resolution is for the applicant to get permits from the Police
Department.
Cm. Jennings asked if the applicants wanted to address the Commission or if anyone had any further questions; hearing none
she closed the public hearing.
On motion by cm. Hughes, seconded by Cm. Musser, and with a vote of 4-1-0, with Cm. Oravetz absent, the Planning
Commission unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 24
A RESOLUTION OF TI-IE PLANNING COMMISSION
APPROVING PA 99-022 LORETTA'S HAIR SALON
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT REQUEST TO ESTABLISH A MASSAGE ESTABLISI-I3'IENT WlTI-IIN A 1200
SQUARE FOOT RETAIL TENANT SPACE LOCATED AT 7417 AMADOR VALLEY BOULEV~.
8.4 PA 99-014 Munchkin Daycare Request for Conditional Use Permit for a day care center in a single family home
that will have a maximum of 30 Children. This project would expand the day care facility at this address from 14 to
30 children.
Cm. Jennings asked for the staff report.
Mr. Carrington presented the staff report and two letters to the Planning Commission that he received after packets were
delivered. He stated that the Applicants, Jay and Sushma Krishna are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to increase the
number of children to 30. They are currently operating the Day Care with 12 children. The facility would be the primary use
within an existing single family residence in the Planned Development Zoning District with R-1 Single Family Residential as
the underlying zoning with a 7,000 square foot lot size at 11556 Alegre Drive. The Planning Commission permitted the
expansion of this facility from a Small Family Day Care for 6 children to a Large Family Day Care for 12 children on
February 24, 1998. The applicants and two employees would operate the facility. The Krishna's have one child in the
facility and the employees have three children, resulting in space for twenty-si~ additional children. The day care center
would operate from 7:00 a.m. until 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. He determined that the noise of children would be
relatively slight. He stated that the traffic impacts were studied, and if there were several people there at one time, it could
create some problems. He stated that he observed the site and noticed that three cars were there at the same time, and there
weren't any problems. He stated that the driveway has room for three cars and possibly six if the cars are tandem parked. He
stated that the occupants would have ample parking in front of the center and on the street to meet the parking demands. The
drop-off period would be changed from 7:15 to 9:00 to 7:00 to 9:30 and people would be limited to stay 10 minutes. He
observed that the average stay was 3-4 minutes per person. The applicant has proposed an agreement that would be signed
by each parent using the center to abide by the conditions. Staff feels parking and traffic would meet the needs of 20
children, not 30. He felt 30 kids would be 2 ½ times'the impact that is currently there. He stated that staff recommends
approval of 20 kids at this time, and to consider 30 kids in a year or so.
~Cm. Johnson stated that they could only park three cars in the driveway; six cars would block the sidewalk, which is against
~ "~ policies. They can't park in the garage, because part of the garage is a playroom and the other part is used for storage.
Planning Commission 77 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
Mr. Carrington stated that was correct.
Cm. Hughes asked how many employees would be there on a regular basis.
Mr. Carrington stated two employees. There would be three employees for 30 children.
Cm. Hughes asked the ages of the children.
Mr. Carrin~on stated they are pre-school kids and some school age kids that would be there after school.
Cm. Hughes asked if the ratio of one adult per ten children is correct.
Mr. Carrin~on was not sure and the applicant could address that during her presentation.
Cm. Johnson asked how this project applies to the ordinance under home business.
Mr. Carrin~on stated it is a Conditional Use Permit and is not addressed by the home occupation section of the ordinance.
He stated that the State of California has gone on record to encourage the provision of daycare and to treat it in the form ora
small family daycare of six or fewer children. When it goes beyond 6 children it is then ok for jurisdictions to treat it as a
conditional use.
Cm. Jennings explained how the public hearing process is conducted. She asked for the people speaking before the
Commission to state their name, address and whether they are in favor or opposed to the proposed project. She asked the
audience to not be argumentative and to not speak among themselves. She asked if the applicant was available.
Nandini Shridhar, represented Mrs. Krishna of Munchkin Care. She stated that she didn't have many comments and thank¢~
Mr. Carrin~on for doing such a great job of explaining all the details. She stated that the parking and mitigation plan they
proposed addresses all of the concerns that the neighbors have. She asked the City to reconsider their position and approve
their original request of 30 children. The project sponsor has several parents waiting to enroll their children into Munchkin
Care. She has observed the parking and the driveway can accommodate six cars at a time. She stated there is a proposal to
expand the driveway to the left, which will provide an additional parking space. Munchkin Care currently has 14 children
and 4 belong to the owner and the employees. Of the 16 additional children, 8 will be school age children. She stated that
Mrs. Krishna is going to request that the parents of the school children to park on Amarillo Drive and not to come into the
cul-de-sac. Staff has determined in the Negative Declaration that the proposed expansion would not have any impacts on
traffic, safety or parking in the cul-de-sac. She concluded her presentation and asked if anyone had any questions.
Cm. Jennings asked how many infants would there be.
Ms. Shridhar stated there would be four infants.
Cm. Jennings asked how many pre-school children were currently at Munchkin Care.
Mrs. Krishna responded six children.
Cm. Jennings asked what time the Nielsen Children arrive in the afternoon.
Mrs. Krishna said it depends on the early bird, late bird schedule. There are kids who get out at 1:00 and some that get out at
3:00.
Cm. Jennings asked if most of the School age children are kindergartners. :~
Planning Commission 78 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
/~"'{rs. Krishna responded from kindergarten to second grade.
Cm. Jennings asked if they would increase the number of employees since there are four infants.
Mrs. Krishna stated that would depend on the licensing requirements. The State has very stringent requirements for infants.
They require 35 square feet of play space, and a separate room for the cribs.
Cm. Jennings asked if there is a designated bedroom downstairs.
Mrs. Krishna stated it is a single story home.
Cm. Jennings is concerned with the children only being outside at 3:00.
Mrs. Krishna said they are required to provide a schedule to the State and the children would be let out from 3:00 to 5:00. In
the morning they would stagger the kids playing outside.
Cm. Jennings asked if snacks or meals are provided for the kids.
Mrs. Krishna said she considered signing up for the food and nutrition program, but there are a variety of children from
different backgrounds. She said the parents provide the snacks and the lunch.
Cm. Jennings asked how would they enforce that the parent's cars do not pile up.
Mrs. Krishna stated that they are not living in the home, and there are two parking spaces in the garage. Two °fher
.:~ployees have small children, and they will park in the garage. She stated that she is the only person who is licensed to
~pen and close the center and she will park on Amarillo or Hansen Drive. She said that they have never had more than three
parents there at the same time.
Cm. Musser asked what the State guidelines are on the amount of space per child.
Mrs. Krishna stated 35 square feet inside and 75 square feet outside. For the infants the crib space is different than the play
space.
Cm. Musser asked the square footage of the house.
Mrs. Krishna responded approximately 1,800 square feet.
Cm. Hughes asked how many instructors dare required per child.
Mrs. Krishna stated that for the ages of 0-2, it is one instructor per four infants; for pre-school kids ages 2-5 it is one
instructor per 12 kids, ages 6 and up it is one instructor to 14 children.
Cm. Hughes stated that they would need at least three to four instructors.
Mrs. Krishna stated that if they were to hire more staff members, they would not be allowed to park on Alegre Drive.
Cm. Johnson asked if the children from Nielsen are dropped offat her facility before school.
~"'"~rs. Krishna said She escorts them to and from school.
yes.
Planning Commission 79 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
Cm. Johnson stated he was not fond of the employees parking on Amarillo because the parking spaces are generally for the
people who live in the area. Employees should park at the daycare property and then they would not annoy the residents.
That will limit the number of parking spaces for parents dropping off.or picking up. The driveway is not long enough for g,~
cars and it would block the sidewalk and may put Mrs. Krishna in a position of liability.
Cm. Hughes asked if the municipal code prohibits tandem parking in Dublin.
Mr. Carrington stated the Zoning Ordinance does not allow tandem parking to meet parking requirements.
Mr. Peabody stated that the Lube & Latte project had a form of tandem parking but the project was not approved. There is
some flexibility on parking standards for Unusual circumstances.
Cm. Hughes asked if there are any unusual circumstances that would allow tandem parking for this project.
Mr. Carrington stated no; there has to be one parking space for each employee, which would be three or four spaces.
Cm. Hughes stated if they are going to have 30 children, they will need four employees which will exceed the number of
parking spaces.
Mr. Carrington stated that there are only three parking spaces in the driveway without tandem parking. There :are two
parking spaces in the garage.
Cm. Jennings asked if they planned on widening the driveway.
Mrs. Shridhar said the parking would be on the existing driveway. They planned on paving an area to the left of the
driveway for one car to park. ~
Mr. Carrington sttited that the parking ordinance does not allow parking in the side yard setback.
Mr. Peabody stated side yard parking is only allowed for recreational vehicles.
Mrs. Shridhar asked if a car could park there temporarily.
Mr. Carrington responded no. Recreational vehicles are the only vehicles allowed to park there.
Mr. Peabody stated the reason vehicles are not allowed to park in the side yard is because a vehicle would not allow fire
access to the side of the house..
Cm. Hughes asked if the garage was a two-car garage.
Mrs. Shridhar stated it is a three-car garage. Part of the garage has been converted to a playroom but it still allows parking
for two cars. She felt staff.has had a chance to come out and observe the site. She has proposed penalties if the parents park
incorrectly.
Cm. Jennings asked how' the parking would be enforced for the parents.
Mrs. Shridhar said that they would not wait for the neighbors to complain to impose a penalty. The employees would walk
the kids to the cars or install a camera to monitor the parking arrangement outside.
Planning Commission 80 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
Mr. Fukamaki, 11524 Streambed Place, spoke on behalf of the applicant. He said that staff should look at the traffic impacts
.,.----{'or Neilsen Elementary School. He felt with the small traffic impacts the City should look at how they take care of their
( tizens and their day care needs. All communities need quahty day care.
Mary Miller, 11600 Alegre Drive, said she has raised kids and had a day care. She felt this facility was not a home daycare.
They are moving out and leaving a business behind. This is a tiny street. Although the day care does not infringe on her, the
neighborhood should not have a business. She wants to keep the neighborhood quiet and stated that she is opposed to the
project.
Sue Krishna stated for the record that she has been residing at 11586 AIegre Drive for ten years and started Munchkin Care a
few years ago. She has pursued course work in early childhood development and loves working with children. She is happy
to offer this important service and believes that 30 children is still keeping the business small. She asked for the
community's support for this project.
Edward Perea, 11550 Ale~e Drive stated that he is opposed to the project. He stated there are 12 homes on Aiegre Drive.
He is concerned about the property values of the homes and the increase in traffic. With Nielsen School close by the parents
use their cul-de-sac as a turn around. When people are tired or rushed they will speed and there was an incident in the past
with one of the neighbor girls almost getting hit by a car from a parent dropping off. He stated that parking six cars in the
driveway would block the sidewalk and his driveway has been obstructed on three different occasions. He does not have a
problem with the noise right now, but increasing to 30 children will make a significant change in noise. Having a daycare
facility next door will have a negative impact if he wanted to sell his home. This daycare is a business in a residential area
and feels the use should not be allowed.
· Curtis Susiki, 7641 Arbor Creek Circle, supported the expansion of the day car facility. He felt there is a demand for quality
childcare. It is difficult trying to find high quality childcare providers and feels that ifa loving person wants to provide
~:/~'",?are, the community should appauld their effort. He would recommend Mrs. Krishna to anyone looking for childcare.
~ urged the Planning Commission tO approve this project.
Danny Kilburn, 4459 Downing Court, Pleasanton, supported the project. His son goes to the center and felt that he has
become a well-rounded 4-year-old. He stated that Mrs. Krishna has taken excellent care of his son and has learned a lot from
her. He felt traffic or parking problems may or may not occur, and it would be a shame to deny this project on something
that may or may not happen.
Toni Zuanich 11599 Ale~e Drive is opposed to the increase. He agreed that it is an important service to the community and
supported their previous increase from 6-12 children. He felt it is now apparent that there is a day care on his street. The
traffic and parking will be a problem for the street.
Tammy Santos, 6608 Pioneer Lane, Dublin, works for Munchkin Care. She has been able to work and receive free childcare
for her children. The expansion will allow her to have a better salary and benefits for her children. She would like to see the
expansion be approved.
Maddi Misheloff, 11613 Ale~e Drive wanted to know what would happen to the property once it is vacated.
Julian Misre, 11598 Alegre Drive, was opposed to the project due to increased parking and traffic safety of the children in the
neighborhood.
Kristen DeLaGardie, 89 San Marco Place in San Ramon, worked for the daycare. She stated that she is a young mother able
to pursue her studies while receiving free daycare. She asked for approval of the project.
Planning Commission 81 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
Sally Leonard, Childcare Links, at 1576 Catalina Court, Livermore, offered statistics to the Commission. She stated that all
the parents would not be arriving at once. There is a dire need for childcare in the entire valley but can't say if this is an
appropriate place or an inappropriate place. She stated that the staffing would meet licensing regulations. '~ii~
Cm. Hughes stated his math indicates the need of 4 instructors for the daycare.
Mrs. Leonard stated the licensing regulation allows 1-4 instructors for children under 2, 1-12 instructors for children ages 2-
5, and 1-14 instructors for school age children.
Cm. Hughes stated 3 instructors for 30 children are the absolute maximum allowed from the State of California.
Mrs. Leonard said if they had more than 30 children, it would require more instructors. The center has the option on how the
age groups are going to work.
Cm. Hughes asked what happens when an instructor is escorting the kids to Nielsen School.
Mrs. Leonard stated it depends on how many children are left in the home. The licensing ratio would still need to be
maintained in the home when an instructor is gone.
Cm. Hughes was concerned with the statement the applicant made that she will be gone twice a day to escort the kids to and
from school.
Mrs. Leonard stated that issue will have to be addressed by Mrs. Krishna. Mrs. Krishna could take pre-school kids with her
while escorting the school age kids.
Cm. Hughes stated that it might be more of an issue with the community. Everyone in this room believes this is a well-run
daycare center; everyone in the room is concerned with the well being of the children and he also has that concern.
Mrs. Leonard stated that is also the concern of the agency she works for.
Cm. Hughes stated that one of the concerns is the parking issue. Ifa fourth instructor is needed, there are only three legal
parking spaces. He is concerned with the parking issue as well as a safety issue with the i~ids.
Mrs. Leonard stated it was a valid point.
Cm. Hughes stated if they have a maximum of 30 kids, one instructor could not leave without having another instructor there.
Mrs. Leonard stated that there would not be 30 kids left in the facility when the instructor is escorting the school age kids.
There may have to be some pre-school kids who have to walk with the instructor to drop offthe other children.
Cm. Jennings asked the requirements of ECE units for anyone other than the director of the daycare.
Mrs. Leonard stated that they would require a minimum of 6 early childhood education units as long as the instructor has 12
ECE units or working towards those units. They must have a childhood development class, a curriculum class and child
family in the community, which is knowing what the community resources are for families. Someone may act as a teacher if
they have 6 units and enrolled in college'working towards the 12 units.
Jay Krishna, 11586 Alegre Drive stated they have lived in their home for over 10 years. He stated that they are aware of
traffic issues due to the Neilsen School. They have thought long and hard on ways to support the business without impacting
their own personal investment. He stated the expansion would result in eight additional school age children. They proposed
a traffic mitigation plan based on the concerns of the neighbors and adequately address any traffic or parking problems. He:~
Planning Commission 82 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
stated that they will remain residents of Dublin and will always be available to address any concerns that may arise in relation
~,e'"~o Munchkin Care. He stated this has been an expensive proposal and asked for approval. The issue about the side entrance
~ ~ncerns Can be solved bY acCesSing the main entrance of the home. He has discussed the issue of resale values with an
experienced agent and indicated that there have not been any impacts on other properties in Dublin near daycares facilities.
They will meet any childcare licensing requirements and can change the playroom in the garage back into a parking space.
Cm. Jennings asked if anyone else wished to speak, hearing none she closed the public hearing. She asked Mr. Krishna if he
received a letter from the Silvergate Highlands Home Owners Association about their CC&R's.
Mr. Krishna responded yes. They have looked at the CC&R's and they are in compliance.
Cm. Hughes was impressed with what the Krishna's have done. The issue ofdaycare in Dublin has sometimes been a very
volatile issue. As a credit to the neighbors and the Krishna's, it was nice to see everyone get along and express their views in
a friendly manner. He stated that he has always voted in favor ofdaycare centers. He felt that having a daycare in any thing
other than a residential neighborhood is not appropriate. The statement that a daycare is a business is correct, and a business
is entitled to make a profit and to expand to continue to be successful. The issue of property values carries no weight with
him. He stated that property values are not impacted in this community by daycare centers. The Planning Commission is
here to represent the entire community and this is a community issue. The Commission has to weigh the interest of the
applicant with the interest of the neighbors and with the interest of the community. He had a grave concern on the parking
issue. He felt the center should have at least 3 instructors, and realistically they should have 4 instructors. Under the
municipal code, they can't consider tandem parking. He felt that the parking at the center will have a negative impact on the
community and it is not fair to the neighbors. There have been a lot of comments on traffic and it is in an area that is already
congested. The issue with the noise of the children should not be considered as the typical noise; the sound of children to
most people is a pleasant thing. This dayCare is a little different than most daycares in the community because it is in a quiet
cul-de-sac and weighing all the interests he voted against the project.
.m. Musser stated he was a strong supporter of daycares and agreed there is a dire need for childcare in the community. He
was impressed that the opponents of the project agreed this was a quality daycare. The issue here is not the quality of the
daycare, but the location and he had a problem supporting this project at this location. He felt there is existing traffic and
parking problems with Neilsen Elementary School. Many people buy a house on a cul-de-sac to get away from the noise
and traffic. Children playing is not a bad noise. With traffic being a issue, and the increased number of children does create
a problem. There is not enough parking on the end of the cul-de-sac and felt that 6 cars in the driveway are in violation of the
parking requirements. He visited the site and the existing residents already took up some of the parking. The tandem parking
will not work and would block the sidewalk. The design of the court compounds the problem with traffic and parking. He
felt that property values were not an issue. The number of instructors is also a problem. He stated that he could not support
the project as it stands.
Cm. Johnson agreed with Cm. Hughes and Cm. Musser and can't support the project because of the location.
On motion by Cm. Musser denying the project, seconded by Cm. Johnson, and with a vote of 4-0-1 with Cm. Oravetz
absent, the Planning Commission unanimously adopted
RESOLUTION NO. 99 - 25
A RESOLUTION OF ~ PLANNING COMMISSION
DENYING PA 99-014 MUNCHKIN-CARE DAY CARE CENTER CONDITIONAL USE PERMIt REQUEST IN A
PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT), SINGLE FAMII.Y RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AT 11586 ALEGRE
DRIVE
Planning Commission 83 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
NEW OR UNFINISHED BUSINESS ~
Mr. Peabody stated there was an issue brought to the attention of the City Council regarding sign ordinance changes. As a
result, direction was given to form a committee, with a member of the Planning Commission, a member of the City Council
and 5 other people to come up with options on automobile dealers, and businesses that have used banners and promotional
signs. Vice Mayor Lockhart has been appointed by the City Council and asked for a Planning Commission volunteer to sit
on this committee.
Cm. Hughes volunteered for the committee.
Mr. Peabody asked if he could commit during the day and if every two weeks would meet with his schedule.
Cm. Hughes stated yes and that his mornings are light.
Cm. Johnson asked if other Planning Commissioners could make comments on the issue.
Mr. Peabody stated yes.
Cm. Johnson stated he has been there a couple of times and new talent would be great. He commented that the City Council
will not enforce the ordinance.
Mr. Peabody said staff'has accomplished a great deal in the areas where the City Council has directed staff to be forceful.
The City is down to a few enforcement issues that need to be addressed.
Cm. Johnson stated the big problem was the tax base the dealerships provide for the City.
Mr. Peabody went over the upcoming schedule.
ADJOURNMENT
Being no further business, the meeting was adjourned at 9:35 p.m.
- Respectfully submittbd,
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Community Development Director
Planning Commission 84 June 22, 1999
Regular Meeting
RESOLUTION NO. 99 ' 25
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF DUBLIN
DENYING PA 99-014 MUNCHKIN-CARE DAY CARE CENTER CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT REQUEST IN A PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT), SINGLE FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT AT 11586 ALEGRE DRIVE
WI-IEREAS, Jay and Sushma Krishna submitted an application requesting approval of a
Conditional Use Permit for the operation of a Day Care Center, for a maximum of 30 children, as the
primary use within an existing single-family residence in a PD (Planned Development), Single Family
Residential Zoning District, located at 11586 Alegre Drive; and
WHEREAS, the application has been reviewed in accordance with the provisions of the
Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and a Negative Declaration has been adopted (Planning
Commission Resolution No. 99- ) for this project as it will have no significant effect on the
environment; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on said application on June 22,
1999; and
WHEREAS, proper notice Of said public hearing waS~giVen in all respects as required by law;
and
~-IEREAS, the Staff Report determined that the project would have episodic impacts to traffic
and parking that would not be acceptable; and
WHEREAS, the Staff Report was submitted recommending that the apPlication for a Day Care
Center for 30 children be denied; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did hear and considor 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:
A. The proposed operation of the day care center is not compatible with other land uses,
transportation and service facilities in the vicinity because episodic impacts to traffic and parking
would have negative impacts on the neighborhood.
B. The use due to episodic impact to traffic and parking will adversely affect the health or
safety of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or be detrimental to the public health, safety
and welfare.
C. The use will be injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood because of
episodic impacts to traffic and parking.
D. There are adequate provisions for public access, water, sanitation, and public utilities and
services to ensure that the proposed use and related structures would not be detrimental to the
public health, safety, and welfare.
E. Insufficient parking would be available to the staffand parents with only three parking
spaces in the driveway.
F. The subject site is physically suitable for the type, density and intensity of the use and
related structures being proposed.
G. The Munchkin-Care Day Care Center is contrary to the specific intent clauses,
development regulations, or performance standards established for the zoning district in which it
is located because of episodic impacts to traffic and parking.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE Dublin Planning Commission does hereby Deny
PA 99-014 Munchkin-Care Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit application as generally depicted
by materials lab'eled Exhibit A on file with the Dublin Planning Department.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 22nd day of June, 1999.
AYES: Cm. Jennings, Johnson, Hughes, and Musser
NOES:
ABSENT: Oravetz
Planning Commission Chairperson
ATTEST:
Director of Community Development
g:pa99014\cupresodenial
2
[]! ...... ffi >est-it" Fax Note 7671 _ %~
J~e 17, 1~9 ~ ~ ~'
Mr. ~die Peab~ -=' v~ ~ ....
~mmu~ Development D~tor ' '
Ci~ of Du~ P~ning Dcp~e~t ~
Ci~ ~c=, ~00 Cite Pla=
~b~n, C~o~i~ 9~568
S~JE~: Proje~ P~9~ 14 Munc~ C~e Day C~e Center ~ndidon~ U~ Pe~c
Dear Mr. Peaboch~:
I am writing on be~lf of Ms. Sushma Krishna thc o~-ner/Project sponsor of
Mucb. t.Srt Care Day Care Center. This letter is in response to two letters .mbmitted to the
City of Dublin Plarming Department by the project sponsors ne'=zghboring residents, the
Perea and the Mis'ra families (be neighbors) on Ale~e Drive. This letter is also a follow-up
of my di.~--ussion yesterday with Dennis Carringron of your staff. Mr. Carri~gton essendalls,
i~dicated that in light of the issues raised in the letters, smffis considering recommend~g
deni=l of the coru:Iition~l use authorization requested ir~ the above referenced permit
application. However, I would Iike m reiterate that'the City of DuNin Traffic En~neers
a~d tbe Planning Department staff Imve collectively determir~d ttmt the proposed
extm~ion ofMtmOt~-Care ~rom 14 cl-dldren to 30 chilctren would hax~ no impacts on
traffic, parking, noL~e and safety i~ tbe cuI-de~aac on Alege. INSv=. As I discussed with Mr-
C_.az-zin~on, I strongly urge the Ci~ to consider the various letters written in support of the
proposed project wNc_k oum-mber the two.letters ti'mt oppose the project simply on the
ba~ks of a hypotheticxl effect on property values and recommend approval of the use
application.
Iff addition, to ~lleviate thc concern.~ ra~ed in the letters ~ubmitted by the
neighlx~rs Mr. Carrin~on and I also diseased a number of parlSng and traffic initiation
m~.sures that would sigmificantt7 reduce any potenrlal noise and safety concerns the
neigl~ors may trove. The Parking and TrafFic Mitigation Plan below proposed by the
ow~zer/project spon~or include various initiation measures that would be imptdme_~red
upon approval of the conditional ~e application. Each issue raised in the letters opposing
the project is restated below and then followed by initiation toe-in.ires tlmt specificity
ad'ess all off thg concerns listed. Please note that the project spon.,ors are continuing to
rn=l~e ~m effort to resolve these issues ~-ith the parties opposi~ the proposed proj~cr-
tswa~ #1 Parl.4,~g
~ Employ~ !rarl~g would be dOubled during the hour~ of operation (7 a.m. - 6:30 p.m.).
o Customer (parent) parking while dropping and picldnC up z~uld be considerably
increase~ if not double&
- Obstruction of neighboring driveways
Mtmeh!.~n-Care Parl~ng and Tra/fic Mitigation Plan Response #1
Drit, ew~. P.a. rh'rte Plan at Muneh/dn, C~re
The application currently states that the proposed Day-Care Center operation would
commence at 7am and dose at 6 pm from Monday through Friday and the current drop-of
and pick-up hours are between 7.15 am to 9 am and from 4.30 pm to 6 pm. To be more
accurate the Day Care Center drotyo£ and pick-up hours would range from 7am to 9.30
and from 4 pm to 6.30 pm r~pectivel¥. Hence, there is an approximately 90-minute period
in r. he AM and PM hours when th~ children's parents (the parents) could use the existing 6
drivea-ay-parking spaces (includes 3 tandem-see Exhibit A) on the subject site for periods of
up to 10 m~nutes ~'ithout occulting any curbside parldng spaces in the cul-de-sac.
However, since Munc.~. 'n-Care employees occupy 2 drivewa~-parlring spaces, only 4
l~rking spaces are available to the parents currendy. With the current limit of ten minute
par~g on the drive~a¥ and the staggered drop-off and pick-up and hours appro:dmateI¥
36 cars could parle on the drY,ray over a 90 minute period even under the current
· operating conditions at the subject site. Statistically, the chances of cars blocking
meigb._boring driveways or oveicrowdlng in the cul-de-sac are almost impo.~ible with the
amount of parldng available on-site.
.~,
Fm-r_her, under the proposed purl,rug plan which would include a previoush/.stated
drive~ay expansion proposal, 7 driveway-parking spaces (including 3 tandem parting
spac.~) would be made a~ilable to the parents at all times during the day. The project
sponsor and the employees would park their vehicles along Amarillo Drive across NeiNon's
and walk to r. he project site thereby eliminating an,/employee partdng needs and at least 3
trips into the cul-de~ac. Therefore, 63 cars could potentially park for periods of up to 10
minutes within the 90-minute drop-of and piclc-up periods. The parldng mitigation plan as
proposed would completely eliminate all potential for cam Necking neighboring driveways
since all projected demand £or parldng would be accommodated on the subject property
driveway and no curbside parking would be used in the cul<!e~ac
Acldition=l~y, the project sponsors ~511 require all parents to sign an a~eement that would
subject r. hem to a penatW of up to $20 for an3~ parldng ~-iolation such as bloddng driveways,
using curbside parldng in the cul-cle-sac or failing to vacate a driveway parking space wit/bin
ten minutes. Parents would be required to ~mlly check for drive~-ay-pazl-lng availability at
Muncb~qn-Care from the intersection of Amarillo and Ale .gte Drive before entering the
cut-de-sac. Munchldn-Care employees would also visualt~ monitor potential par~g
violations at the Day Gale ~ertter on a d.ily basis by escorting the children to the cars
and/or through a remote (c. mefa) Surve~lbn~'~tem:
Issue #! Traffic
- The amount of Traffic would be increased considerably, if not doubled.
- Speeding traffic from hurried parents presents mfety hazards for neighboring children
' -Traffic is already above the norm~l level of a cul-de-sac due to the prozimity of Neilso~s
School. Parents of school children already we r_he cul-de-sac as a tumround.
Mtm,-ht-h,-Care ParkSug ami T~c Mitlgatlon' Pl=v, Pu~onse #2
Traffic Contvo! Meamres
Requiring parenm of school age chilctren to park along Amarillo Drive and w_~ltc to
Mu5chkin-Care during ctrop-of and Pick-uP hours would further con=o] traffic flo~Sng in
and out of the cul-de-sac With the proposed expun~ion, appr~Smately 16 additional
children would be aa,~itted to the DayOare Center, o£wki& at least 8 are expected to be
school age cbilA~en. The project sponsor therefore, anticipates only 8 additional nips ~to
the cuMe-sac at this time, which clearly amounts to ail insign~Cant increase in traffic
within the cul-de-sac. Please note that 4 of the proposed 30 spaces would be occupied by
~5 the employees and the owners children leaving only a total of 26 children that wo~d be
· e~olted reader tbe proposed Day Care Center Plan.
Trafi~u: Safe~
As mentioned in the application pae~ge, u-al-lc from Nei]son's has been signifim_~tly
reduced due to class-~ize reduction over the y~tvs si. nee 1997. Therefore, the concerns
regarding traffic being above the "normal level" or parents exceeding required ~ limits
in r. he cul-de-sac are invali& The neighbors have no way of determining whether the cazs
exceeSing the exi~ng speed limit~ are those coming to Munchkin-Care or the on~ coming
to Neilsons and. entering the cul-de-sac to mm around. XI1 parents are advised m adhere to
~ speed ]imit~ pos-ted in ~h. vicinity of the subject-site. The Neilsons School traffic
monitor at the intersection of.Am=vilto and Ale~e fiarr_her oversees any traffic going ~ md
out of the cul-de~ac and has reported no unsafe conditions presented bs' the existing L~eel
of traf-~c in the cul-de-sac. In fact, the traffic impact is so negligible that when approached
for a comment on the proposed Day Care Center, the Neilsons traffic crossing monitor
indicated that she had no tmowledge ora the existing day-care operation since the impacts
were barely noticeable.
Isme ~3 Noise
Increased noise let, els due to added vehio~hv traffic
Increased noise levels during parents drop-off/pick-up of their children
06'/17/99 T]~ 07:09 F,,t~ X ..~
- Exterior noise would be increased duc to the added re, tuber of children outside
MunchkSn-Care Parlr~ng and Traffic Mid~fion Plan Response #3
Noise
The proposed parking and traffic mitigation plan would generate no parl.'ing demand and
significantly reduce trips in and out of the cul-de-sac thereby ha~-ing no potential noise
impacts from increased traffic. On~-ite noise impacts from the existing gate to the
Munchldn~are phyroom area from the driveway would be mitigated by leaving r_he gate
open during drop-of and pick-up horn's. Further, outdoor ac~4ties for the children would
be limited to the hours of 3 pm to 5 pm. in the afternoons thereby resulting in no change
in the exterior noise levels from the subject site.
Laztty', as Mr. Carrin~°n and I dizcmsed and a~eed the Parking and Miri~tion plan
proposed herein wonlc! adequately address ail of the concerns raised in the neighbors'
let-gem. In light oft_he proposed Parking and Mitigation plan we request that the staff
recommend approval of the proposed day Care Center project. There is a significant la&
of Day Care services tike Muncbl~n-care in the Community. Thc City and the commm, ity
would clearly lose an opportunivt to have an excellent Day-Care Center it:it were to
recommend denial of the proposed application.
Tb=nlr you'for the opportunity to respond to the public comment st-df has received for the
proposed Mrmc_hl~ Care Day Care Center project, if you have any questions regarding
the responses in this letter, please do not hesitate to contact me at (650)329-i764.
UTS~
Nandini N. Shr~, AICP
encz Exhibit
Two Letters from neighbors
cz Mr. Dennis Carringron, Senior Planner
Ju1-09-99 03:53P Zebrack Gibson Krone 510 763 1617 P.02
MARJORY F. GIBSON
Attorney at Law
405 - I4th Street, Suite 1615
Oakland, California 94612
Telephone: (510) 763-i616
Facsimile: (510) 763-1617
Of Counsel,
JOEL ZEBRACK
July 9, 1999
MayOr and Members of the City Council
City of Dublin
IiX) Civic Plaza
Dublin. CA 94568
,, Re: Appeal of denial of PA 99-014 Munchkin Care Day Care Center CUP Application
Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council:
My client Mrs. Sushma Krishna has requested that I prepare the following
appeal of the denial by the planning commission of a conditional use permit to
increase to thirty children at her existing day care center located at her home at 11586
Alegre Drive, Dublin. She ha~s now modified her application to request a conditional
use permit for twenty children. The facility is currently licensed for 14 children with a
conditional use permit allowing 12 children.
Mrs. Kfishna has a B,A. degree and is currently pursuing a certificaie course in
early childhood education. She has worked at I-Iopyard Country Day School in
Pleasanton as a teacher for one year and has run a home day care business since
September, 1994 at the present location. My client understands the concerns of her
neighbors regarding the expansion of her facility and therefore, willingly adopts the
conditions of approval suggested by the Planning staff with regard to limiting the
number of children t° 20 rather than the 30 spaces originally applied for. The CC&Rs
of the Silve~ate Homeowners' Association permits residential uses and other uses
"specifically permitted by local ordinance." Child care in a residential area is permitted
by City of Dublin ordinance chapter number 8.12 and has been encouraged by this
City Council.
The applicant is not only willing to adopt the conditions of approval
recommended by the planning staff to the Commission but in addition will support and
enforce them by requiring parents to read and sign rules supported by £mes and
ejection of a student for failm-e to abide by these rules. A copy of these proposed rules
is attached. In addition to the approval conditions stated in the staff report even though
Alegre Drive is designed for 25 mph speed, the following rule laa~ b.ee~, added:
Speed in the Aleere Drive cul-de-sac shall not exceed 10 miles per hour,'
Ju1-09-99 03:54P Zebrack Gibson Krone 510 763 1617 P.02
July 9, 1999
Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Dublin
page 2
Parking is sufficient for the proposed enrollment of 20 children. Staff who are
required to be present during the time children arrive and depart will be parked within
the enclosed garage. The three spaces outside the garage and one curbside parking
space will be reserved for the children and the conditions of approval may need to be
modified in this regard. This is more on-site parking than was required for similar
facilities which have received conditional use permits. In addition it is likely that
siblings will be enrolled which will reduce the need for drop off space.
As to the noise concerns expressed recently by our neighbor regarding our entry
gate, my clients will replace that gate with one that buffers the closing sound.
With regard to concerns over episodic traffic impacts, it has been my client's
experience that with twelve children there has always been adequate parldng. Planning
Staff obmrved the property from 8:00 a.m. until 9:0(') a.m on June 17, I999 and saw
seven children dropped off at that time without traffic conflicts or speeding. Similarly,
with the increased enrollment of eight children, some of which are likely to be
siblings, there should be no substantial increase in traffic impacts.
The location of this day care center is especially convenient for parents who
both have children attending only Nielsen elementary school and who may also have
children needing day care. The children dropped at our day care center who also attend
Nielsen are walked to Nielsen through the street guard protected crosswaIk. Thus this
facility reduces traffic at the Nielsen high traffic impacted hours.
My clients are prepared to reserve four (4) spots in the program for children
at-tending Nielsen. The parents of these Neilsen children will be required to park in
spots other than the four parking spaces mentioned above or any other frontage spots
in the cul-de-sac and walk their children to the Munchkin Day Care Center. Thus, the
day care center is environmentally supportive of the community in terms of the health
and safety of the public in that it provides parents with the opportunity to drop off ail
their children close by and thus not add to the total traffic of the community by having
to drive ali over town to get thek children to their programs.
This day care center is not only not injurious to the neighborhood, it is an asset
in that it allows nearby neighbors to have a child care center that supports the local
elementary school. My client has had enrolled in her center the children of a neighbor
on the street whose letter of support is included in the applicant packet. The neighbor
has stated that the traffic on the cul-de-sac is no more affected by Munchkin day care
than it is by the local elementary school. (letter of Stephanie Tackett dated March
25,1999)
Jul-Og-gg 03:54P Zebrack Gibson Krone 510 763 1617 P.04
July 9, 1999
Mayor and Members of the City Council
City of Dublin
page 3
With your vote for the proposed conditions of approval for twenty children and
the roles proposed by the applicant, there Would be more room for other children who
need a safe, loving, nurturing environmen£.
Sincerely yours,
Gibson
Ju1-09-99 03:54P Zebrack Gibson Krone 510 763 1617 P.05
Amend.ed Tr ffi,c.M . ' mion Plm
4 .... p~t ~rking: 3 hi ~ivc~ay ~fl I hi f~nm~ (~ ~ 4). T~s safi~ r~uit~en~s for 20
ch~ per Du~ City Or~, P/e~¢ nol~ th~ ~ch p~klng ha,v not been a
requi~ment at other approved home ehlldc~a ~nters ~n ~ublin,
5, ~ditioa~y, g~n~ ff s~mo]-age cl~l~ ~ be ~uimd ~ pm'k
gi~ ~r~ng ~ m~onod ~v~ ~ ~). o~r ~on~c ~pors ia the c~]-ae-sac ~a children ~hall
be wa~e~ lo 115~ ~gm drive.
1, P~U ~ ~ ~ui~ to ~i~ a p~ng aha ~vMg ~ ~r~mcnt (a~hca).
2. ~ four ~o~ for ~e ~sch~l ~c of Nicls~ school-ag~ ~ffla~n wJfl
dm~ ~ pi~-up ~ sbh~l_a8o chil~n ~ ~es ofltcr ~
~pick-up fim~ ~cr~y helphg ~e ~ighbor~od in ~ucing
~atc fl~o n~d for ~ma~ ofNi~ sch~l-~e ~itdrea to drive ~o~d
3. B~ a cu]~, Ale~e DNve i~ pa~i~larty guild for Munchkia
~ot ~n s~ ~ mu~ ~s ~ co~d on a ~ough ~ ~is ~an arclr~cs a s~c cnviromnont for
~y, ~d ~t in~0y for ~le eMI~ at MuncI~in C~d C~.
L M~in ~td ~ is Iooag~ on a I~gc pro~ (over ~0,000 ~q, ~,) which helps to n~ga~e any
~~ about noise fro~ child~ playing in tiro pm~ p~s~. ~Ic sig~nt, sop~t.i~n from
o~ n~~ b~d ~c ~o~ f~er h~lp~ mi~c$ any potea~ noise ~nccrns.
2. G~ no,c: ~f$ wi~ ~ ad~ by ~ing ~c ~in en~co to ~c homo.
3. ~ ~at amcad~ aPPOrtion for 20 eMI~ s~ ~p~v~ for only 8
~ liafi~ outdoor pla~ ~ 9mm-10.00 a.m in ~c mo~g mid 3p.m - 5.00p.m
~ w~ bc no ~ge h ~C ~erior noiso l~vcls ~m ~e site.
~ Jul-Og-g9 03:54P Zebrack Gibson Krone 510 763 1617 P 06
CARl,'_, PARKING AND DRIVING SAFET
AGREEMENT
L Speed in the Alegre Drive cul-de-sac shall not exceed/0, miles per hour.
2. Drop-off and pick-up parking will be restricted tO three spots on thc driveway at
11586 Alegre Drive and one curb-s/de spot at 11586; Alegre Drive. Obstruction of
neighboring driveways is strictly prohibited, Drop'ofttimes will be from
7.00a. m-9.30a, m;Pick, up times will be from 3,30p,m -6.00p.m,
3. Drop-off and pick-up parking time will be restricted to a maximum of I0
minutes.
4. Parents of school-age children from Nielsea School must park in spots other than
the four ' · parking spaces mentioaed above or any other fronLag~ spots
the cul-de-sac and children shall be walked to 11586 Alegre Drive.
s. First-t/me failure to comply with these requirements will result in a :~20 fine,
6. Continued failure to 6omply with these requirements will result in ejection of the
child from Munchkin Care,
.__, agree to the above parking and driving safety
regulations ~nd undea~tand the consequences of failing to comply,
Date: ~'-
Sue ICrishng: Da~e:
ATTAChmENT 8
11699 Padre Way
Dublin, CA 94568
828-5150
M~ch 25, 1999
City of Dublin
100 Civic Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
Yo Whom it May ConcJm: ~
.--.. I am v,a'iting this letter in support of Sue Krishna efforts to increase the capacity of children
in her day-care located on Alegre Drive. My family and I lived at 11599 Alegre for about a one and
. a half years. As a parent, I realize the importance ofquality child-care and was happy to find it
I across the street. Sue and her aids frequently took care of my dauzhters and they received excellent
I care in her home.
!
The traffic on our cul-de-sac is no more effected by Sue's day-care than it is by the local
elementary school. The parents of the children in Sue's care are very aware of the fact that her
facility is located in a neighborhood and they are very courteous to those living on the street. They
drive slow and do not park for long periods of time.
-'., It is my desire to see Sue expand her care facility in order to meet the growing demands of
our community. I understand Joy is going to stop accepting children for after-school care and Sue's
facility would offer parents a wonderful alternative. The children are happy and well cared for and
I a/ways look forward to placing my girls in Sue's care.
'.' Sincerely,
Stephanie Tackett
June 7, 1999
Neighbors
Ale~e Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
RE: Project PA99-014 Munchkin Care Day Care Center Conditional Use Permit
Dear Neighbor,
Recently, we received a letter fi-om the City of Dublin informing us that the Munchkin Day Care
Center (11586 Ale~e Drive) applied to expand their present maximum of 12 children to a
maximum capacity of 30 children. Last year, the faeilty expanded from 6 to its present capacity
of 12 children. It has been our experience as neighbors that problems will occur from this
expansion. We feel the following are sigrfificant issues of concern:
Parking
Employee Parking would be doubled during the hOurs of operation (7 a.m.- 6:30 p.m.).
· Customer (Parent) parking while drOpping offand pic 'king up would be considerably
increased, ffnot doubled.
· Obstruction of neighboring driveways.
As residents we all 'know that parking is Iknited in the Cul_de_sac, especially during Nielsen School
functions.
Traffic/Safety
· The amount oftraf~c would be increased considerably, if not doubled.
· Speeding traffic fi-om hurried parents presents safety hazards for neighborhood children.
· Traffic is already above the normal level of a cul-de-sac due to the proximity of Nielsen
School. Parents of school children akeady use the end of the cul-de-sac as a turnaround.
Noise
· Increased noise levels due to added vehicular traffic.
· Increased noise levels during parents drop-off/pick-up of their children.
· Exterior noise would be increased due to the added n .umber 0f children .outside, ....
Resale Home Values
When we purchased our home almost 2 years ago, the sellers disclosed (by law) to us that there
was a daycare facility next door x~dth a maximum of six children. Six children did no~ s~em to be
a problem. However, shortly thereafter, it increased to twelve. In our opinion, any increase
above the current capacity poses the above-mentioned problems. We adore this neighborhood
and do not plan on moving anytime soon. But realistically, we will eventn~Mty se_~ o.q~ ~,~1~ ~u~jt
as you may. Ask yourself-this' question, as a potential home buyer would you w,~t~5
,, ,; 2i i t"%bJ
j { {;.T;.,,I ii
nex~tdoor or nearby a daycare facility with 30 children? Or, would you be willing to pay top dollar
for the home? We see this as a bargaining tool for the buyer.
On June 1, 1999, we received a letter from the Krishnas regarding their daycare expansion. In the
letter, they address the issue of traffic. If they are addressing the issue, it must be an important
one. They state that parent arrival times will be "staggered". How is this possible? Each parent
would have to be able to set their own arrival schedule around the other parents schedules.
Arrival schedules are dictated by work and school schedules. There is a normal window of time
that drop-offs and pick-ups occur. That is why the facilty is open before and after normal
business working hours. Many parents already drop-offand pick-up their children at the same
time. Another of their concerns in the letter was "speeding". Hmmmm...Our concern as well.
We don't believe that any of the parents speed with the intent to cause any harm. However, we
all -know that when one is late, rushed or exhausted, especially after a hard day at work, they can
get careless.
We in no way want to offend or cause any harm to the Krishna's. They are wonderful people.
However, they happen to have a business--and this is business. We feel the Munc 'hkin Daycare
Center is at its maximum capacity in our beautiful neighborhood. The fact that our home was
located in a cul-de-sac was a very important factor in our decision to buy a home on Alegre
Drive. A cul-de-sac by its very nature is supposed to limit traffic and thus increase safety for
everyone, especially children. We have two small children and do not want to lose this inherent
safety benefit. With the daycare facility at its present maximum of 12 children, we have already
experienced people blocking our driveway and speeding in and out to pick up their children.
Remember this is a residential neighborhood, not a business district. .... Letrs keep it that ,,al:
On June 22, 1999 at 7:00 p.m. in the Civic Center Council Chambers, located at 100 Civic Plaza,
Dublin, a public hearing will be held for an issn~r~ce ora conditional use permit to increase the
daycare facility capacity. Any interested person may appear and be heard regarding this matter.
Please join us on June 22 and voice your concerns. If you have any questions or comments, please
feel free to contact either myself, Ed, or my wife, Angelica, at home 833-1129.
Sincerely,
The P ",e~La Family
11550 .~egre Drive, Dublin
cc: Maxine Jermings, Chairperson - Planning Commission
Ralph D. Hughes, Planning Commissioner
Don Johnson, Planning Commissioner
Fred Musser, Planning Commissioner
Tony Oravetv, Planning Commissioner
Eddie Peabody, Jr., Director of Community Development
Dennis Carrin~on, Senior Planner
Fire Marshall, City of Dublin Fire Department
Traffic Unit and Parking Enforcement, Dublin Police Department
Mr, Eddic P~abody .tr.
i D' .=%'tor crfCommunity Development
City of DubIin ,.
IOO CMz
DubIirt CA 94568
Sub]~::~: PA 99-014 Munchkln Care Day Cm'e C,e~er
~ Mr.
w= ~ v~ much ~on=~rn*~hk-~~r-~&/~r~'~~ ~p~;on or
~ cent~ o~ed ~ Mr. & ~ ~ We s~ s~ pr~t~ ~ng from the condid~
p~ ~ by ~e Ci~ to ~e ~n~ ~I~e bmln~ ~ we boast our hous= at 1159g Alegre
D~e ~ ~ 996. we ~ ~z n~ghb~h~ ~o retain ~id~ff~l for not 6nly our chffd
ozh~ neigh' chiI&~ ~ Mr, & ~. KHs~'~d~ tb~ businm~ in I~97, we
und~ ~om M~. Kds~ ~ ~ ~mb~ ofchil&~ she w~i b= ~g f~ w=s six =t
We r~l~ f~nd om ~m y~ ~t ~ ,umb~ ofchilflr~ N meNe which has ~d imp~
~, ~Nng n~e and ~ for ~ifl~= of~= nzi~bmho~ in ~e
~ quke a few m=siom, we bye ~d ~ubl, g~ing in ~8 ~ of our own ~ew~y ~ ~e
~.~g lo pi~ ~ d~ offfie ch~&~ ~d ~= ~a~¢ ~o our ~y b]~. M~. ~shna's
S~fng b a~ a pr~Iem ~ ~n~ ~ ~hing~o drop offor p~ ihz~
gin= Og ~t a~a~i~, of~i~b=im ~ff:, p~kNg eI~ m out home, and noise h~ve d~mhely
in=~.
Al=~= D~e ~s = eugde-saz ~d n~ a ~ugh ~ whi~ m~= man~ ~ ~ ~ople ~e
In ~e ~ ~ only ~d to dml wih ~he ~bl~ ofw~ ~ p~g ~om a~viti~ ofthe Ni~ts~
~h~k wgh ~e ~ion of~e ~y ~ ~ in 199Z ~ ~ b~me w~e. '-
We would al~ l~ to remind the ei~ ~t ~e xub~iv~i~n ~ ~n~ ~idemiM not eomm~=i~
fl= p~ing ~mmission to r~d= ~e~ ~ndifional p~it of~pamiom tn ~e p~ we did nor
prm~.~ ~mplai~ simply b~ we w~e t~ing lo M go~ n=q~bo= m ~. ThN tin= ~ougN
we ~~ objzzt to the ~ion of~ fl~ ~ ~nl~ ~m ~t it ~ no~ to ~ meximum of
_'-'C: .- .....
Ralph rD. Hughes, Planning Con,missioner
~red Musser, Planning Co~missioner
Tcny Oravetv, Planning Co~issioner
~ Dennis Carrington, Senior Planner
Tom Banlz, Association Hmnager
~: D~-~qect DLa~ N' ' ' _
........... ~-_,Z~ Flunchkin Care Day Care CenEer ,lonsi5ztnal
Dear CiEv Official's & PJr. Ban~z
~'~e are owners oz a resioence iocaEed a~ ]i~z4 _'~iegre ~;r'~e in
borne of i~586 A~e,Jre Drive. W~ strongly oppose this proposal~
lam ~zea~ aiwavs have been and ".-."~ '~ ' "' ' .....
...... = ino. 'Y.z.u sen5 ~ ier~er c,f :'.e3a~iTe
?lease., DO NOT=.===,,z-z=~;~ FOP. m---~___ =_~[P_~2~SIO!~ OF TEIS __=Ae=Ltm*'' ~~_ _.~ ..... ~"= ...... ~ ..
- ~ ' ~ ' "~ ' ~' - ~- ~ .~ ~,-- ~ ' ~ -'. ~ ~ ~ 4 ,-. --',-- '~ '~ z .. ' · ' ... _ , . J ....
SILVERGATE HIGHi, ASSOCIATION
Pacific Property Management
17 Crow Canyon Court, Suite 210
San Ramon, CA 94583
(925) 820-7472
June 16, 1999
Mr. & Mrs. Jayant Krishna
11586 Alegre Court
Dublin, CA 94568 ·
RE: Daycare in your home
Dear Mr. & Mrs. Krishna:
The Silveraate Hiahlands Board of Directors has Ken made aware that you are
currently r~nning'fi daycare center from your home. Additionally we have been
advised that you plan to stop usin.~ your home as a residence and to turn it into a
full scaL daycar,, center.
We ask you to refer to the aoverning documents of your homeowners association,
which, in Article IV, SectiOn 4. i, state, "Each residence shall be used soleh, for
residential purposes." Unfortunately, the use of your home as part time or a full
time daycare center is not a residennal purpose.
Your documents continue by saying, "No Owner may permit or cause am,zhing to be
done. or kept upon,_ , in or about, his Lot which rnio~ht. _ obstruct or inte~ere ¢virh the
~.hrx of other Chnners or ~,'hzch would be noxtous, harmful or unreasonably
o~}nxive to other Owners. According to your neighbors who have called'our
omce, your current daycare, and your alleged plans to expand, is offensive to them.
Please provide the Association with details of your current daycare operation and
future plans. Optimally, the Association would Iike to see r.he daycare center
operations suspended and your residence returned to the purpose for wkich if was
intended.
Sincerely ),ours.
BOA~dD OF DIRECToRs
S!LVEROATE HIGHLANDS ASSOCIATION
RECEIVED.~
JUN 3 0 19.99
Elizabeth Kiiburn CITY OF DUBLi--
11333 Rolling Hills Drive
Dublin, CA 94568
June 28, 1999
The Honorable Guy S. Houston
Mayor, City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
RE: Meeting June 22, 1999 - Public Hearing Item 8.4 PA 99-014 Munchkin Daycare Expansion
Dear Mayor:
I am a parent of a child who attends Munchkin Day Care. I was present at the meeting on Jun~ £2nd
when the Planning Commission ruled against the expansion of Munchkin Daycare to 30 children. It was
apparent that their decision was based solely on concerns of parking and excessive traffic in the cul-de-
sac. It seems as though the Commissioners did not even consider the impact on traffic or parking if they
were allowed to expand to 20 children as was also proposed.
Furthermore, parking limitations were placed on the Krishna's that I do not believe to be logical or within
legal boundaries. Although neighbors have made allegations that driveways have been blocked and cars
were driving too fast down the street, none of the claims have been substantiated, either that they
happened, or that the violator was a parent of Munchkin Daycare. Therefore, I would ask you to consider
that these are not problems that exist because ofthe day care. Since the Krishna's are appealing the
decision of June 22, I would like to express my thoughts on these issues and others brought up by
neighbors at the hearing.
Parking
I was very upset to hear the Commissioners limit the allowed parking for The Krishna's to three spots in
their driveway. I can not believe that they have the authority to disallow what was refered to as "tandem
parking" in their driveway if there are staff members cars in the garage. Fudhermore, I find it ~,bso,rutely
unbelievable that they can restrict The Krishna's parking rights to only their driveway. As visitors to the
residence, we should have a right to park anywhere on that street. If one of The Kdshna's neighbors were
to have a party, be assured that guest parking would not be limited to the driveway of the party host. To '
go as far as to include Amarillo as "off-limits" parking is preposterous!
The Commissioners indicated that for parents to park in front of a neighbors house was infringing on the
homeowners right to park there. 1 drop off my son between 8:00-8:15am and pick him up between 5:10-
5:20pm every day. On the curve of the cul-de-sac there is hardly ever a neighbors car parked in the
street. Further down the street, closer to Amarillo, there are cars parked in front of the houses on a
regular basis. I have never had a problem finding appropriate parking. With the staff parking in the
garage, three spots in the driveway and at least four spots on the curve of the cul-de-sac, I don't believe.
there are any potential parking problems for parents dropping off and picking up, especially considering the
short-term stay. Also, keep in mind that all parents are not there at the same time.
AII CH E tT t+
Munchkin Day Care Expansion Page 2 of 3
Increase in Traffic
As of this date there are 14 children who attend Munchkin Daycare. Eight of those children are siblings.
Four of the children belong to staff members. There is a total of_nine, cars not counting the resident Mrs.
Krishna who does not create any additional traffic by her sons attendance. Only seven of those cars are
non-staff members. To expand to 20 children would only add a maximum of six cars. That is fifteen cars.
total (thirteen non-staff). By being licensed for twelve, you are already allowing twelve vehicles down the
street. What is the problem with three more?
I realize that in your deliberation, you must consider that if licensed for 20 children, there is the potential
for twenty vehicles. However, please keep in mind that many of the children already in Munchkin Daycare
have been there since they. w~e infants.. My.son has been there for three years. Most of the children
have been there since he started, or were newly enrolled after the 1998 expansion. Many will attend
Neilsen School and maintain their enrollment for before and after school care. My point is that there is not
a great deal of "turn-over" in enrollment at this facility. The children who are there are stayina, including
the siblings, which keeps the vehicle count lower than twenty. I know of no child who has terminated
enrollment allowing a spot to become open in the last three years. This should also indicate to you the
quality of care provided by Munchkin Daycare.
It is true that the Neilsen School creates a problem with traffic between 8:25am and 8:45am on Amarillo
which sometime~'°Verflows on Alegre,' but Why should Munchkin Day Care be punished for that problem.
That is something the Planning Commission should take up as a separate issue. I rarely encounter a
problem with traffic from the school because ! am there before and after the normal school drop-off and
pick-up times as are many of the other parents. In the evening when it is more likely for several parents
to arrive at the same time, there is never a problem with school traffic, and parking along Amarillo would
not be a problem at all. If Sue asked me to park on Amarillo and walk to her house, I would do so.
One resident of Alegre indicated the "American Dream" of teaching his child to ride a bike on the cul-de-
sac. This really bothered me. My belief is that if you want to teach your child to ride a bike, a public
street, in the road., is not the place. Dublin [California] is not. small tow_n America where these types of
activities can take place. That is why there are hundreds of parks in this area and sidewalks provided for
the safety of pede~trian.s and bike ri~ers. The road, whether a cul-de-sac or not, is not the ptace to teach
your child to ride a bike!
As a parent of a 4 year old, who has lived on a court with 12 homes and 16 children, I can understand the
concerns of the neighbors for their children's safety. However, I do not think that safety is.jeopardized by
this day care facility or its participants. As parents, and frequent travelers on the cul-de-sac, we are
aware of the likelihood of children in the street and are more apt to be cautious than a stranger or even a
parent of a Neilsen student, proceeding down the street to make a U-turn. One resident mentioned that
there were ten children living on Alegre. In the three years I have been making the trip down that street I
have seen only three children playing outside. I never saw more than two children at one time. There is a
playeround at Neilsen School where most of these children can play safely, close to their homes. On our
court, where 16 children (sometimes all at once) play basketball, roller blade, play with chalk, etc., I have
had to teach my son that our street is a road made for cars, which you happen to play in. Common sense
should tell you, if you don't want you child in danger of being hit by a car, don't let them play in the road!
Munchkin Bay Care Expansion Page 3 of 3
Increase in Noise
There was also talk of increased noise with the traffic that would be generated by the proposed expansion.
The traffic times for the day care are weekdays between 7:30am-6:OOpm. During these hours most people
are on their way to work or school. Not all parents arrive at once. We don't drive tanks, tractors,
garbage trucks, cars without mufflers, trucks with back-up beepers, or have loud conversations in the
street. I fail to see how noise would be an issue.
Need for Quality/Affordable Day Care Facilities
Ail the Commissioners agreed that the need for quality daycare programs was evident, and that Mrs.
Krishna provides that service. Sue and Jay Krishna are responsible people. TheY maintain a home that is
one of the nicest on the street. Even though the neighbors are opposed to the expansion, they have
nothing but good things to say about The Krishna's as.neighbors and people. I think I can speak for all the
parents, when I express my admiration for them as well. ! respect the talent, drive and determination of
Sue Krishna to provide a much needed service for the children and their parents. The children are cared for
with a great deal of love, and the parents can go to work each day knowing that their children are being
cared for in the best possible way. It takes a special person to do this well.
This is not a job to Sue. This is something she truly enjoys, and it shows. I remember when we first met.
Sue told me that she was not in this to make money. (She runs one of the most affordable facilities in this
area). This was a way for her to be with her own child and also with other children, to help them learn
and grow. There is no other job that would fulfill her. In addition, she has enabled two young mothers to
care for their own children while helping her to care for and teach our children. My son has developed a
very special bond with Sue, Tammy and Kristen as well as all the other kids.
In closing, I would like to summarize that I find it extremely upsetting that you find it within your authority
to restrict the visitor parking for 11586 Alegre to three spaces in the driveway of that residence. To do
this you would have to restrict the neighbors parking rights as well. I don't believe noise would be an
issue, nor would the safety of the residents or their children be compromised in any way. Sue and Jay
Krishna are very reputable people who are providing a much needed service with the utmost dignity and
respect for all involved.
How can you deny the proposal for 20 children that would only add a maximum of six cars to a number
already as Iow as nine, when this type of facility is so needed in our communities? Why not give the
Krishna's and Munchkin Daycare the opportunity to prove they can provide quaiity day care for 20 children
without compromising the peaceful atmosphere of Alegre? What would prevent the City of Dublin from
revoking the license for expansion if indeed there were problems that were proven to be a result of such
expansion? I respectfully ask that you reconsider the decision of June 22 and approve Munchkin Daycare
for expansion so that others may also benefit from the services provided by The Krishna's and their staff.
Sincerely,
Elizabeth Kilburn
RECEIVED
July 6, 1999 JUL 1 2 1999
CITY OF DUBLIN
Mayor Guy Houston
City of Dublin
100 Civic Plaza
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mayor Houston:
How otten do you hear that we live in one of the most expensive regions of the United
States? How many families do you know of that have a full time stay at home parent to
care for the children? Why do more and more companies provide daycare services as
part of their operations?
As working parents of two toddlers we would like to express our strong support for the
expansion ofMunc 'hkin Care Childcare Center at 11586 Alegre Drive in Dublin. We
have been residents of Dublin since 1989 and have been associated with Mufichkin Care
since 1996. Our three year old has been with Munchkin Care since he was four months
old, and our nine month old has been there for five months.
One of the hardest things we have had to do as parents was to find someone with whom
we could leave our children for nine hours a day, five days a week. That's not an easy
task, especially when you know that your child's development will certainly be impacted
by such an experience. We feel very comfortable with the concept ofchildcare and
believe it can have a very positive effect on our children, but we also know there are risks
with such an arrangement. You need to have a lot of trust in your childcare provider
before you can bring those risks down to an acceptable level.
We strongly believe that Sushma Krishna and the Munehkin Care Childcare Center offer
a safe, friendly and learning-oriented environment for our children. Munchkin Care
Childcare Center is a place where the risks are minimized and benefits can be seen in all
the children.
Please join us in supporting the expansion of Munchkin Care Childcare Center.
Sincerely,
Dan Sebastiard Cynthia g. Sebastiani
ATT C[ EHT tS
Wednesday, July 7~, 1999
To the City Council of Dublin:
I am writing this letter in order to pledge support for ex2mnsion of the Munchkin Daycare Center in
Dublin. I have lived in the Dublin Community for over 15 years. I have 4 children, theft ages ranging
from 6 to 18. Three of my children have attended Nielson, Wells Middle School, and have graduated or
are presently attending Dublin High. In all my years of child-raising, I still strug~gle to find quality child
care, and incL~:l perceive this as an ongoing community need. With Joy Preschool/Daycare now only
offering childcare from 3~d grade and below., the need for ~ality ckildcltre inteln~fies. Munchen Daycare.,
only ~mlking distance from Nielson, indeed gives parents more options. I wholeheartedly support the
expansion of the Munchen Daycare Center.
Sincerely.
Lisa M. Dettenrieder
~"~ ~Date: June 29th 1999.
"' RECEIVED
From
Ravi Sethuraman JUL 0 9 1999
42, Longhorn Court, O[T~ OF DUBLIN
San Ramon, California
To
The Mayor,
Dublin City Council,
Dublin, California.
Dear Sir [Madam,
I lived in Dublin for the past 5 years and moved to San ~amon
last month. Over these here we have received excellent references on Sushma
as a quality childcare provider. My wife has recently joined the work force
and we both are working in the tri-valley area. We have two daughters who
are of the ages 4 ~ and 1 year old respectively. We have always counted on
SusBrna as the person who can provide the needed child care for our
daughters once we both start working. She, hOwever, was not able to provide
us the service now because of the space limitations enforced by her permit.
She did mention to us that she has a pending application with the city
council for an service expansion. I am sure you understand how difficult is to
find a childcare provider with very good references from your trustable
sources. Currently we are managing our child care needs through our friends
on a ad-hoc basis. We are with the hope of availing Sushma's services on a
permanent basis and work peacefully once she gets the approval form the city
council. Kindly gTant her the necessary expansion permit.
I appreciate your time and effort.
Sincerely yours,
(SETHUI:LhMAN RA~q)
JUL 0 9 1999
June 29, 1999 {~'J'~ OF OUSLIN
Re: Need for quality daycare in Dublin
I am the mother of a two year old girl residing in Dublin, CA. As somebody who has
been involved in the difficult search for good daycare, I would like to express how
important it is that Sushma be allowed to expand her daycare facility. There is a strong
demand for quality daycare such as hers in this area. A lot of parents who live in the
Dublin and adjoining areas are really counting on her to take care of their children.
Thank you.
D Carrington ,
From: Fawn Holman
Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 9:28 AM
To: D Carrington
Subject: MunChkin Care
Hi Dennis, here's an internet email re: one of your projects. (Hard copy also being routed to you). Fawn
---Original Message
From: Comments_Form@leticia.abag.ca.gov [mailto:Comments_Form@leticia.abag.ca.gov] <mailto:
[ma ilto: Comments_Form~leticia.abag.ca.g ov_'l>
Sent: Friday, July 09, 1999 6:50 PM
To: undisclosed-recipients:;
Subject: City of Dublin - Comments
- Friday, July 09, i999 at 18:50:07 (PDT..)
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascH
<html>
Name: John & Carol Goss, Email: <mn!c@home.com <mailto:mn!c@home.com>>
Address:
11601 Alegre Drive
Dublin, CA
Phone: 925-829-2675
Subject:Project 99-014, Munchkin Care, Conditional Use Permit
Comments: Dear Mr. Houston and City Councilmembers:
We have lived at the above address for the past 13 years. During that time we have experienced considerable traffic due
to Nielsen School. VVhen the school population was substantial decreased because of the opening of Dublin Elementary,
we saw a significant decrease in traffic. However, because we are a street that is still impacted by the school, we do not
feel that increasing Munchkin Care from 12 children to 30 is practical. None of us in the neighborhood had a problem with
the increase to 12 children, but 30 is excessive.
We do not dispute the fact that there is an extreme need for quality day care, or that the Krishna's provide that quality of
care, or that the Krishna's are wonderful people. We do take issue with the fact that our little street is not the place for
such a large business. This is a quiet (except during school of course) residential cul-de-sac street. Many p. eople with
small children purposely purchase homes on a cul-de-sac street for safety for their children. We now have six small
children living on this street. We also do not care for the fact that the Krishna's intend on moving out and using this home
stdctly as a day care. This means the home would be vacant every weekend, holidays, etc.
The Planning Commission (meeting which we attended) denied this expansion based on traffic issues, parking and just not
the right place for a large day care. We concur, as have all of our neighbors. We have all worked very hard not to make
this a contentious situation, and we have been successful. Although the Krishna's have the right to appeal, we are
distressed that they have chosen to continue to pursue this issue knowing how all of the neighbors object to the increase.
Although it may take some time, we are sure that the Krishna's could lease space somewhere else to run their business.
Thank you.
John & Carol Goss
</html>
'..... we.:. are.'.., Opposed..,.to., the. eXpanSion
':~:~'~' ~.. :~
~ ~ '.:,..-~.,.,~. : . ... .... .
~.--.~ ~.~:.~_.:~ .?"-'?~?ii!¥~':'."!i::.?:.. :'. .
' .... ' '"i:f::.'%: '
%..~.'~ ................. . .... ~' ~-~::.-~:. : :...:.... . . ~:1,.~:~..~T~..~.~:7:~.1~.,:..''
:. ......~..'-., ~.':f..:'.:::. :. - .
.,..~ :.~.
~:~.~,L~E~:::;~..~ ,~ . . . :.~::.7~.~??~.--:.-... :.~ ................... :.~....:..:..:,.. ::~.'.::;'?.:~:.~.-.
..... -~.~.:......~.- .......... :..:~.~.....~ ~ '.?..- .~ ..
,~:~E .. .;"~'..::~".:..~:.-~:. ~: .... ~. ,...~-:....f.~:'.... '...,... ...... .'.' ...- -. ~.'.. ~ .~.....'.. -'. "" ':.:......... .. '. ', "' ..:..
"~'" ":L:':. ': T.. :¥: ~L:;.:'.:': '~ ' ~ : . ' . ' ..-: '~ :'.~'?' :' .. -..' :." ..~...'. :' ' -:~ ' : ·
.... - .... ? .:'.~-:....
., -:..-:? '..: ~::':: ~: ?:~:: ;.'..'-~ :.:::.:.. .'::'.?. ;.. - .~::. ::: ..
~:~' :? '1~.:.
_ . :~. ~ .... ..¥.:... ~,...~
':¥ ...- ~ ~ , -: ,.'."::'.:.~.. :..-..
..-.. ·
. -: .. ... :. :..~ ..-: ~.,~.~::.: ....
:~ ~ :. :.. ....... ......
..::~:~.' ~ ~:.. ? ~;..~ -
.?.~. :~ -~....-:~7..~..... ".~..~ I' "" ' '?'
...... ~:~ .-: ~.:~.~?t~:....::' ~:~:?:.¥:~-...~ :¥:: ..?..: -~"....¥ ..~?: ~:: .'~.~ ....... .... _ .... - .-:..-
~.:-..:-.:-...:..:~: ......... ....The-. .... ..... asking~
~ :'.'.:'::-:: ' ...... · S:::Q~:: '~'::" "'
~: :L.~ "-": ~' ':"" ::"" '":~' ':' ' ""
'-:::::.~:?-:.' ':.::'7 ' ".-' '~-' :"' ' ~. :.' ~:: ~..::: . ~:"'-.. '-.. ?' -
th ' ":' ' ' --' ' --" j:day te~
~n:-:.-double their care~ Cen
..... ..::-..:.:?:~:.:...:.~:...:.:. · .:..... ..
:~ e '.... -' ' ~ ""' ' "'~' ':: ' -"'
..... ~:..:j. - . .., ..... . ~ ~ : ........... ... . · . .~ .... . ..... . ..........
CHILD CARE LINKS o
tResources ,or Fam' y D ~¥~t~,,~ (_.,/
July 14, 1999
Mayor Guy Houston
City of Dublin
P. O. Box 2340
Dublin, CA 94568
Dear Mayor Houston:
This letter is being sent at the request of Sue Krishna, a licensed faniily child care
provider in Dublin, who is applying to the City to open a licensed child care center so that
she may increase the number of school-age children for whom she provides care.
Child Care Links is a not for profit agency that, among other activities, provides child
care referrals to parents seeking care in the Valley. Our records indicate that there is a
need for 240 more school-age care slots in Dublin. This is just to meet the need. Ideally,
there should be 15% more spaces available than there is need so that parents may have a
true choice in selecting appropriate care for their children.
If you would like more information on child care supply and demand in Dublin or the
Valley, please do not hesitate to contact me.
Sincerely,
(,,.,-
Sally Leonard
Resource and Referral Coordinator
Cc: Sue Krishna
ATT C AENT Z l
1576 Catalina Court Tri-Cities Office Pleasanton Office Oakland Office
Livermore. CA 94550-6,.t10 (510) 791-9256 (925! 484-286g 1510~ 53.3-0283
(925~ 455-5111 FAX (5'10) 713-0:;:';5 FAX (510~, 536-0271
FAX (925) 606-0347
~.naih~childcare!inks org
wwv,, ch;Idcarehnks erg