In a decision made more than a week after he heard testimony both for and against the request, interim Community Development Director Dan Marks approved Kristi Claverie’s use permit to operate a day care center at her home at 579 Cooper Drive.
Marks heard the request March 10. While Claverie received support from family members who also work in day care as well as from clients and at least one new neighbor, others on Cooper Drive said her proposal would add too much traffic on a cul-de-sac so narrow it is virtually a one-way street. A few also worried that noise from the day care would be disruptive.
Claverie has been running a day care at 130 Gill Way, and has wanted to provide in-home day care from 7 a.m. to 6 p.m. Mondays through Fridays, with 30 minutes of flexibility at either end of those hours in case a parent has an emergency.
No matter her enrollment, only 14 children would be allowed at the day care at one time.
She said she has long-time clients who understand the need to follow the rules designed to prevent upsetting neighbors. “They are respectful with parking, dropoffs and pickups,” she said.
But some neighbors who objected to the request said another Cooper Drive resident has an import business that requires delivery trucks making frequent stops; that for cars to turn around, they often have to drive the entire length of the street and use the cul-de-sac’s end as a turnabout; and that the area has had fires that have forced evacuation of the street.
Marks issued his decision Friday and acknowledged opponents’ concerns. Explaining that he used state and local codes in making his ruling, he wrote that according to the California Health and Safety Code, Benicia is prevented from prohibiting large family day care homes for nine to 14 children on parcels zoned for single-family homes. However, he said Benicia can require a use permit before such a business is opened.
He said that use permit must be granted if the day care complies with all requirements related to spacing and concentration, traffic control, parking, noise and State Fire Marshal regulations.
He added that Benicia Municipal Code has no standards for spacing and concentration, and Cooper Drive has no other day care business. Concerning traffic, he wrote that a large family day care could generate up to 56 trips a day, but those trips are staggered because the business doesn’t have a set start and finish time as do school schedules.
“The result is that all vehicles are not arriving or leaving at the same time,” Marks wrote.
Cooper Drive is 45 feet wide, typical of many of Southampton subdivision’s Phase II-VI streets.
“The standard minimum width for a two-way street is 12-foot-wide driving lanes with eight-foot-wide parking lanes on both sides, resulting in a 40-foot-wide street to maintain the flow of traffic and provide adequate room for parking,” he wrote.
He explained that even if every parent dropped off only one child during peak hours, between 8 a.m. and 9 a.m. and again between 4:30 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., the 14 two-way trips “would not be considered a significant traffic impact on a standard residential street.”
The home’s two parking spaces in a garage and three additional spaces in the driveway meet the municipal code requirement of one space for every seven children, he wrote, and the day care would be required to comply with exterior noise level maximums in sensitive areas because residential areas are considered “sensitive.”
He limited the number of children playing outside to eight at any given time, choosing that number because the city allows day cares serving up to eight children to operate without any additional review.
Benicia Fire Department’s final review includes an inspection of the day care, and its approval is required before she obtains necessary permits from the state’s Community Care Licensing Division.
Marks’s approval reiterated that residents at the home must park in the garage or driveway and that day care employees, visitors and clients must park in legal spaces along Cooper Drive.
If no one appeals, the use permit becomes effective April 3.
Sharing is caring!
I’m glad I’m not her neighbor!
Really Heather? And why not exactly?
So what exactly in this article comes across as distasteful? Children perhaps? I hate to point out the painfully obvious fact here, but you were once a child. GASP! Without children there is no future.
Without daycare, women are forced to stay at home or not have children at all. Do you NOT support empowering women? Where would you have the children go? Institutions perhaps, rather than a loving home environment?
Or maybe you’re just one of those not-in-my-neighborhood kind of people. Hypocrite much?
It sounds like neither she nor I would like to be your neighbor either. Just sayin’
Heather Dunn? You would really use the name of a murdered Benicia high school girl from 22 years ago!?! Shame on you!
Some comments:
1) I can understand the neighbor’s objections. It is called “residential” for a reason. 14 kids is quite a few to be kept at one house. That means about 28-32 cars coming through the area each day (2 trips per child plus those that work there). It would be reasonable to limit the number of kids at a day care center in a residential area. With that many kids she could afford a location zoned for such usage. Do the math 14 kids, at $20.00 per day (that is a guess) =$5,600 a month.
2) Having said that, though. I lived by the high school for 15 years and never found it to be a problem, just an occasional minor inconvenience. But I knew the HS was there when I moved in. If I lived on that street and such a day care was started, I would not be real happy (though likely I would not voice an objection, but that is just me).
3) Consider this also: If it is OK for her to have a dozen kids at her house every day, is it then OK for her neighbor, and then another one and maybe a fourth? Is this likely, no. But the precedence would be set.
Since you are making an issue of nomenclature let’s discuss what “residential” means. It means that it serves as normal living space. In home day care providers LIVE and provide day care out of their HOME.
As for occupancy limitations, in rental situations there are only 2 people per bedroom plus 1 more for the living room are allowed to RESIDE there. So a six bedroom house could legally be rented to a family with two parents and 11 children. If the occupants OWN the house then the city can’t say anything. In the case of the Duggars with 19 kids, they live in a 3 bedroom house. One master bedroom, a girl’s room and a boy’s room. It’s a 6000 square foot house on several acres, so there aren’t any nosy neighbors trying to dictate their lifestyle. But the number of people LIVING in the house isn’t the issue either.
The state sets the limits on the number of children in home daycare. If there are 4 children under 2, then there can only be 8 additional children. A maximum of 12. And an additional adult is required to be there when there are more than 6 kids.
But since we are on the topic of government and neighbors dictating how many people can BE in your house, and apparently 14 (according to you) is far too many for a residential environment…. Shall we impose and enforce such a standard when it comes to your next Super bowl party, Birthday, backyard barbeque, Thanksgiving?….I could go on. Sorry, you’re going to have to rent designated space to accommodate your Christmas festivities with all the out of town aunties and uncles. You have a lot of guests? I’m sure you can afford it.
As for being able to afford a commercially zoned location with $5600/month gross income… did you mean in BENICIA? Because I checked on that too and you’re looking at between $4000 to $6500 a month. You’re also forgetting about payroll for the staff ($1733 a month PER person at minimum wage), plus utilities, food for the children, mandatory insurance, etc. Not realistic.
2. You said, “I lived by the high school for 15 years and never found it to be a problem, just an occasional minor inconvenience.” And then regarding a day care in your same neighborhood, “I would not be real happy.” So, you are honestly saying that 16 cars coming through the neighborhood, staggered over a few hours twice a day is WORSE than 1666 students (actual enrollment, I called) coming and going at exactly the same time? Someone call Chicken Little, THE SKY IS FALLING!!!
3. The city can, in fact, limit the concentration of day cares nearby one another. But that’s not the issue here. You present a straw-man argument and is therefore invalid.
And just for the record, this woman is going through the process legally and completely above board. In the last six years there have been 4 large daycare zoning permits requested. Three of the four instances have been this woman or her family members. And every single time these four legitimate attempts to follow the law have been met with major opposition, as if someone was suggesting a brothel be brought into the neighborhood. Makes you wonder how many people are running daycare without going through the proper legal channels. Yet nobody complains about those. Could it be because they haven’t noticed or that its not happening? Which scenario do you believe to be more plausible?
Wow!!
Did I ever hit a nerve and did you ever miss the points made:
1) I can understand some people objecting. But I would NOT.
2) I work out of my home and would not like 14 kids playing everyday at the house next to mine. But That is their right I would NOT be happy about it, but C’est la vie..
3) . Regarding the high school. I mentioned that point because I found it NOT to be problematic. So 30 cars a day would also NOT be the problem those who object to this would think it to be.
1,666 kids?. You actually took the time to bother the school for that piece of information? really?
Based on your response to my comments it would be easy to conclude that there may be some vested interest on your part regarding this subject.
Yes, you’re right. I know Kristi personally and am quite sick of all the crap I’ve seen her put up with over the last few months.
Some of these comments just show how little people know about this process. The state of California strongly supports, and regulates, family child care homes. These are NOT child care centers. There’s a huge difference. Running a CENTER costs a whole lot more than $5600 a month, and it also employs dozens of people and cares for over 100 children. A family child care HOME is very, very, very different:
1) a family child care MUST be in the provider’s home. It MUST be in a residential neighborhood.
2) The state of CA is aware of how many additional cars this will bring into a neighborhood and they address that in their legislation governing child care homes. They state in the legislation that the additional traffic is not a reason to prevent a child care home in a residential neighborhood.
3) the city takes into consideration if any other child care homes are in the neighborhood. They wouldn’t allow 3, 4, 5 etc child care homes all in a row or all on the same street in a residential neighborhood. That’s regulated and in the state legislation.
4) a city CAN’T deny a person the right to run a large child care in their home as long the provider meets the requirements by the state. Neighbors can’t prevent one or shut one down just because they don’t like it.
5) in the state of CA it is housing discrimination and illegal to deny to rent a house or sell a house to someone who wants to run a child care from the home. Landlords can’t deny it.
And, if you call the local Resource and Referral agency in Solano county they’ll tell you that once a child care is established in the neighborhood there are few (if any) complaints from neighbors after the fact because none of the neighbors’ fears are realized. It just doesn’t disrupt people’s lives they way they fear it will.
This isn’t a halfway house for drug addicts or sex predators. This is a home where little children play and learn. Come on! Of all the evils in the world go find something else about which to worry and complain!
Thanks, BN, for submitting some well informed/factual information on this.
BN stated: ”once a child care is established in the neighborhood there are few (if any) complaints from neighbors after the fact because none of the neighbors’ fears are realized.
Thank you for saying that as it serves to confirm exactly what I stated:
” I lived by the high school for 15 years and never found it to be a problem, just an occasional minor inconvenience”