HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 12151987 - T.8 F• THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA
r
Adopted this Order on _December 15, 1987_by the following vote:
AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, Schroder, Torlakson and McPeak
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAIN: None
SUBJECT: Hearing on Proposed Amendment to the Contra Costa County
Ordinance Code to Add A Child Care Facilities Ordinance
The Clerk of the Board of Supervisors noticed this time for
hearing on the recommendation of the Contra Costa County Planning
Commission on a proposal to amend the Contra Costa County ordinance
Code to add a Child Care Facilities Ordinance, which would provide for
the establishment of child care facilities and/or fees associated with
development. The proposed Ordinance would affect all of the
unincorporated areas of Contra Costa County.
Karl Wandry, Community Development Department, commented on the
needs assessment called for in the proposed ordinance and that the
ordinance is site specific relative to need and he also commented on
the flexibility of the proposed ordinance.
The public hearing was opened and the following people appeared
to speak:
Teri Dean-Mitosinka, 2001 California Street, Concord,
representing the Contra Costa Child Care Council, expressed pleasure
with the proposed Ordinance but presented some requested changes by
the Council.
Supervisor Schroder expressed concern relative to the sick child
care problem in Contra Costa County, and commented that the Board
should work on this problem in the coming year.
David Wheelock, 3020 Grant Street, Concord, representing Contra
Costa Child Care Council, commented on child care needs in Contra
Costa County and the need for child care facilities.
Margaret Butz, 522 Grand Avenue, Concord, representing the
Service Employees International Union Locals in, Contra Costa County as
well as the Central Labor Council, spoke in favor of the ordinance.
Kathy Lafferty, 1344 Sherwood, representing the Contra Costa
Child Care Directors' Association, commented on the issue of
affordable child care and on the need to include language in the
proposed ordinance that includes all the economic levels in Contra
Costa County.
Barbara Taylor, 1280 Boulevard Way, Walnut Creek, representing
the Building Industry Association, expressed that child care is a very
real social need but commented that it was unfair for one segment of
the population to pay for something that would benefit the community
as a whole. She also commented that providing child care facilities
and needs would add to the cost of housing in Contra Costa County.
Terry Curtola, 1280 Boulevard Way, Walnut Creek, representing the
Building Industry Association, commented that he would like
clarification on a number of points that he would present in writing
to staff so they might address his concerns.
1
Lauren Ward, representing the Contra Costa Centre Association,
spoke in opposition to the proposed ordinance.
Ken Jaffe, 924 Balra Drive, E1 Cerrito, a member of the Child
Care Council and parent, commented on the needs of children and
quality child. care.
The public hearing was closed.
Supervisor Schroder commented on the proposed ordinance and that
he would be willing to vote to introduce the ordinance and take Mr.
Ward' s comments and the comments of the Children' s Council into
consideration before the second reading of the ordinance.
Supervisor Fanden commented that the proposed language change as
presented by the Children' s Council should be entertained and that the
comments of Mr. Curtola should be considered. She also commented on
the proposal of child care and the schools. Supervisor Fanden moved
to introduce the ordinance and refer all the proposed changes to staff
to incorporate into the ordinance before adoption.
Supervisor McPeak commented on the proposed language changes and
expressed that the language presented by the Contra Costa Child Care
Council be incorporated wholly as it was submitted. She also
commented on the proposal by the Building Industry Association. She
also requested clarification on the meaning of application and she
proposed language to clarify how long a facility must remain available
for child care purposes.
Supervisor Powers commented that child care facilities should be
permitted in all zoning categories with the possible exception of
heavy industry.
The Board discussed the proposed changes to the ordinance and the
issue of the land use permit.
Supervisor Torlakson requested clarification on the issue of
density transfers, density credit and density bonus.
Supervisor McPeak clarified that the motion was to introduce the
ordinance for adoption, refer those items from the Building Industry
Association and the Contra Costa Child Care Council for incorporation
into the ordinance and the suggestion of Mr. Torlakson relative to
density credit for the provision of child care.
Victor Westman, County Counsel, commented that the ordinance was
to provide for physical infrastructure for child care facilities.
Supervisor McPeak commented that there had been submitted letters
from the Women' s Advisory Committee and the American Federation of
Nurses, SEIU 535, in support of the ordinance.
IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that the proposal to amend the County
Ordinance Code to add a Child Care Facilities Ordinance is APPROVED
and Ordinance 88-1 is INTRODUCED; and Community Development Director
is REQUESTED to review proposed language changes for consideration at
the second reading of the ordinance.
I hereby certify that this is a true and correct copy of
an action taken and entered on the minutes of the
Board of Supervisors on the date shown.
ATTESTED:
PFIL BATCHELOR, Clerk of the Board
of Supervisors and County Administrator
CL 0, j� 10
Ply ' , Deputy
Orig. Dept. : Clerk of the Board
cc: County Administrator
Community Development Dept.
County Counsel
2