HomeMy WebLinkAbout01. PH-Intro Ord Re Large Family Daycare uses within Residentially Zoned PropertiesiteM No.
BYTO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUN&LITY MANAGER
FROM: OFFICE OF THE CITY MANAGER
Y: ALDO E. SCHIDLER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMEN '
DATE: JANUARY 28, 2020
ZONED12UBJECT: A REQUEST TO AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF THE DOWNEY
MUNICIPAL CODE TO COMPLY WITH STATE LEGISLATION RELATED T4:
LARGE FAMILY DAYCARE USES WITHIN RESIDENTIALLY
PROPERTIES
That the City Council introduce:
I7 &DII&.Iy [i] i•
State Legislation categorizes family day care homes in two categories, large family day care
and small family day care. Small family day care homes provide care for up to eight children and
a large family day care home allows up to fourteen children to be cared for within the provider's
dwelling unit. Under prior law, the State regulated small family daycare facilities and allowed
them by right in all residential areas but allowed counties or cities to regulate large family
daycare facilities through a use permit that would evaluate noise, concentration, traffic, and
parking.
On September 5, 2019, the State of California adopted SB 234 (Chapter 244, Family daycare
homes) which became effective on January 1, 2020. This Bill establishes that large family
daycare homes must be treated as a permitted residential use and prohibits local jurisdictions
from regulating large family daycare homes differently from small family daycare uses.
Essentially this bill removed the use permit and evaluation process from local jurisdictions.
The Downey Municipal Code is in compliance with former California Government Code. Small
family day care homes are permitted to care for up to eight (8) children without a review process
but a large family daycare for up to fourteen (14) children requires an Administrative permit.
Additionally, the existing Municipal Code requires a separation of 1,000 -feet between large
family daycare uses..
ZONING CODE AMENDMENT ORDINANCE
JANUARY 28, 2020
PAGE 2
Beginning January 1, 2020, the application process and separation requirement was no longer
required to be met as they conflict with the new legislation. Senate Bill 234 states that there is a
shortage of child care options and a high demand for childcare throughout the state. The Bill
supports large family daycare homes and expresses that the State holds responsibility in making
sure large family daycares are being regulated through the State licensing program instead of
through local authority. As such, Senate Bill 234 removes all review and regulation authority from
local jurisdictions.
The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on December 4, 2019 to review the
proposed zone text amendments. After listening to staff's presentation and opening the hearing,
to which there were no speakers, the Commission concluded the amendments were necessary to
comply with new legislation and voted 5-0 to approve Resolution No. 19-3113 recommending the
City Council approve the proposed Ordinance.
The proposed zone code amendment will remove all conflicts between the existing municipal
code and the new legislation. The attached resolution identifies all proposed deletions of the
existing code text using st4kethfoughs and all proposed new language is identified with Underline
and red font color.
Efficiency & Adaptability
There is no fiscal impact to the City's General Fund associated with this item.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachments: A — Proposed Ordinance
B — Planning Commission Staff Report, Resolution No. 19-3113, and Minutes
C — Senate Bill 234
WHEREAS, on December 4, 2019, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public
hearing, and after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions offered
at the aforesaid public hearing, adopted Planning Commission Resolution No. 19-3113
recommending approval of the proposed Zone Text Amendment to the City Council by a 5-0
vote; and,
WHEREAS, on January 16, 2020, notice of the pending public hearing was published in
the Downey Patriot as a'/8th page ad in accordance with the requirements of the Downey
Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, on January 28, 2020, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to
fully consider all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions regarding the amendment to
the Municipal Code; and,
WHEREAS, having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at said
public hearing, the City Council of the City of Downey finds, determines and declares the
requested Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State
CEQA Guidelines, 14 C.C.R. § 15000 et seq. because it would establish rules and procedures
to permit the operation of facilities already permitted to operate under existing law and make
revisions and clarifications to existing regulations and procedures related thereto. The
amendment would not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment. It is
therefore categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines Sections
15301, 15305, and 15308.
WHEREAS, having further considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it
at said public hearing, the City Council of the City of Downey further finds, determines and
declares that:
A. The requested amendment is necessary and desirable for the development of the
community and is in the interests or furtherance of the public health, safety, and general
welfare. The State adopted SB 234 on September 8, 2019, which finds that child
daycare facilities are desirable and important to have available for working parents due
to the shortage of facilities throughout the state and therefore shall be permitted by right
in any residentially zoned property. The State mandates that all local jurisdictions adopt
the bill as quality and expansion of childcare environments is a necessary need within
the state of California. The proposed Municipal Code Amendments introduce language
that removes regulations and requirements on large family daycare facilities as
mandated by the State Legislature. The State finds that parents prefer child daycares in
a home environment, and is desirable for the development of the community and is in
the interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare.
Attachment "A"
•'l 0
B. The proposed amendment is in general conformance with the General Plan. The
proposed Municipal Code Amendments set forth review, approval, and operational
standards for a sensitive commercial use within the City. The proposed Municipal Code
Amendments set forth a use that will be permitted by right in all residentially zoned
properties without review, approval, or operational standards. General Plan Program
1.3.2.2 — Adjust the codes, policies, and regulations in response to changes in land use
trends. The Municipal Code Amendment addresses a new requirement through the
State Legislature that removes cities or counties from placing restrictions or regulations
on this use. The proposed Municipal Code Amendments are consistent with General
Plan Policy 1.3.2.2 in that staff has evaluated the newer legislation and proposes to
amend its regulations so that the community is maintaining compliance with state law.
The proposed amendments will adjust current regulations to provide residential
properties the ability to operate large family daycare uses, licensed by the State, within
their home within the City.
A011, THEREFORE, COUNCILOF OF DOWNEY DOES
HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The following, Section 9312.06, shall be revised to Chapter 3 of Article IX
of the Downey Municipal Code, and shall read as follows:
Family day care home, child
Large (9-14) S.11- P G11- P 611- P G11- P &hall-nGt-be-wi iR
r
of t a sty -da -y
Small (8 or fewer) P P P P ^tee
SECTION 2. The following, Section 9814.04, shall be revised to Chapter 8 of Article IX
of the Downey Municipal Code, and shall read as follows:
(h) Minor Conditional Use Permit. Minor Conditional Use Permits are for lei
4A-t4a a r outdoor dining areas in the commercial zones.
SIR 0
WrIftell
SECTIOft 3. The following, Section 9813.06, shall be revised to Chapter 3 of Article IA
of the Downey Municipal Code, and shall read as follows: I
.•- • Mixed -Use • Use RegUse' M-Uulations
. ........ .
Nates and Exceptions
Family
• care home, child
Large (9-14) -G P
Small (8 or fewer) P
SECTION 4. The following, Section 9414.06, shall be revised to Chapter 4 of Article I
of the Downey Municipal Code, and shall read as follows: I
(r) Home occupations aP4�a-rge-family-d +9)4G-fGurtee-n444)--Ghi1dren) shal-.
--* be allowed in-the-Gwnef-GGGupied-unit.
more sections, subsections, p rases, or portions be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
ORDINANCE NO.
PAGE 4
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify the adoption of this Ordinance and cause the
same to be published in the manner prescribed by law.
-• rrr•• r .. . r r
BLANCA PACHECO, Mayor
ATTEST:
Maria Alicia Duarte, CMC
City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF DOWNEY )
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Ordinance No. 20- was introduced at a
Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Downey held on the -th day of , 2020,
and adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Downey held on the _ day
of , 2020, by the following vote to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
FURTHER CERTIFY that a summary of the foregoing Ordinance No. 20- was
published in the Downey Patriot, a newspaper of general circulation in the City of Downey, on
2020 (after introduction), and on _, 2020 (after adoption including the
vote thereon). It was also posted in the Regular posting places in the City of Downey on the
same dates.
Maria Alicia Duarte, CMC
City Clerk
STAFF REPORT
Cityo- Downey
PLANNING DIVISION
DATE: DECEMBER 4, 2019
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
SUBMITTED Y: ALDO E. SCHINDLER, DIRECTOR OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
AMENDMENT)SUBJECT: PLN -1 9-00155 (MUNICIPAL CODE e •
AMEND VARIOUS SECTIONS OF ARTICLE IX AND ARTICLE III OF THE
DOWNEY MUNICIPAL CODETO COMPLY WITH STATE LEGISLATION
RELATED TO LARGE FAMILY DAYCARE USES WITHIN
RESID
. -
D • i PROPERTIES
The State of California adopted Senate Bill No. 234 to amend existing legislation regulating
large family daycare uses located in residentially zoned properties. The Bill was passed to
promote large family daycare uses in residentially zoned properties. This Bill will restrict all
jurisdictions from exercising their local authority to require fees, business licenses or use
permits for this use. As a result this Municipal Code Amendment was prepared to reflect the
recently approved bill, by removing sections of the code that would no longer be applicable due
to the new legislation. Based on the analysis contained in this report, staff is recommending the
Planning Commission adopt the following titled resolution:
r• - • r • •• • •
ROPERTIES
•
State Legislation categorizes family day care homes in two categories, large family day care
and small family day care. Small family day care homes provide care for up to eight children and
a large family day care home allows up to fourteen children to be cared for within the provider's
dwelling unit. Under prior law, the State regulated small family daycare facilities and allowed
them by right in all residential areas but allowed counties or cities to regulate large family
daycare facilities through a use permit. The purpose of the use permit was to ensure the large
family daycare home complied with local standards pertaining to noise, concentration, traffic,
and parking. On September 5, 2019, the State of California adopted SB 234 (Chapter 244,
Family daycare homes) to be effective January 1, 2020. This Bill establishes that large family
daycare homes must be treated as a permitted residential use and prohibits local jurisdictions
from regulating large family daycare homes differently from small family daycare uses.
Currently, the Downey Municipal Code has two (2) categories for family day care uses, small
and large. In compliance with former California Government Code, small family day care homes
are considered a residential use of property and are permitted to care for up to 8 children
without a review process. A large family daycare, however, permits up to fourteen (14) children
to be cared for within the provider's dwelling unit. These uses were required to obtain an
Administrative permit which reviewed for consideration of noise, concentration, parking and
traffic control to determine whether the proposed location is best suited for this use.
In compliance with prior State regulations, the existing Municipal Code regulations related to large
family daycare homes require a separation of 1,000 -feet between large family daycare uses along
with an administrative review process. A Minor Conditional Use Permit evaluated potential
impacts to surrounding uses and required positive findings before obtaining approval.
Beginning January 1, 2020, the application process will no longer be required to be met as they
conflict with the new legislation. Senate Bill 234 states that there is a shortage of child care
options and a high demand for childcare throughout the state. The Bill supports large family
daycare homes and expresses that the State holds responsibility in making sure large family
daycares are being regulated through the State licensing program instead of through local
authority. As such, Senate Bill 234 removes all review and regulation authority from local
jurisdictions.
The proposed zone code amendment will remove all conflicts between the existing municipal
code and the new legislation. The attached resolution identifies all proposed deletions of the
existing code text using FmG and all proposed new language is identified with undedmes
and red font color.
The requested Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State
CEQA Guidelines, 14 C.C.R. § 15000 et seq. because it would clarify rules and procedures to
permit the operation of facilities already permitted to operate under existing law and make
revisions and clarifications to existing regulations and procedures related thereto. The
amendment would not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment. It is
therefore categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines Sections
15301, 15305, and 15308.
Municipal Code Amendment (Large Family Daycare Regulations) - PLN -19-00155
December 4, 2019 - Page 2
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 9832.06, there are two (2) findings that must be adopted
prior to approving the Municipal Code Amendments. The findings are as follows:
generalA. The requested amendment is necessary and desirable for the development of the
community and is in the interests or furtherance of the public health, safety, and
The State adopted SB 234 on September 8, 2019, which finds that child daycare
facilities are desirable and important to have available for working parents due to the
shortage of facilities throughout the state and therefore shall be permitted by right in any
residentially zoned property. The State mandates that all local jurisdictions adopt the bill
as quality and expansion of childcare environments is a necessary need within the state
of California. The proposed Municipal Code Amendments introduce language that
removes regulations and requirements on large family daycare facilities as mandated by
the State Legislature. The State finds that parents prefer child daycares in a home
environment, and is desirable for the development of the community and is in the
interest of the public health, safety, and general welfare.
The proposed Municipal Code Amendments set forth a use that will be permitted by right
in all residentially zoned properties without review, approval, or operational standards.
General Plan Program 1.3.2.2 — Adjust the codes, policies, and regulations in response
to changes in land use trends. The Municipal Code Amendment addresses a new
requirement through the State Legislature that removes cities or counties from placing
restrictions or regulations on this use. The proposed Municipal Code Amendments are
consistent with General Plan Policy 1.3.2.2 in that staff has evaluated the newer
legislation and proposes to amend its regulations so that the community is maintaining
compliance with state law. The proposed amendments will adjust current regulations to
provide residential properties the ability to operate large family daycare uses, licensed
by the State, within their home within the City.
Lois]- a r
As of the date that this report was printed, staff has not received correspondence regarding this
application.
Based on the analysis contained within this report, staff is concluding that the proposed
Municipal Code Amendment (PLN -19-00155) is required in order to comply with State law. As
such, staff is recommending that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
approval of the Municipal Code Amendment PLN -19-00155, thereby amending the Municipal
Code with regards to Large Family Daycare uses.
9_
i E Pf^-M - ri
Municipal Code Amendment (Large Family Daycare Regulations) - PLN -19-00155
December 4, 2019 - Page 3
M
THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF DOWNEY DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1, The Planning Commission of the City of Downey does hereby find,
determine and declare that:
A. On September 5, 2019, the Governor signed Senate Bill 234 eliminating local review
authority for large family daycare uses which will become effective January 1, 2020;
and,
B. On November 21, 2019, notice of the pending municipal code amendment was
published in the Downey Patriot as a'/8th page ad in accordance with the
requirements of the Downey Municipal Code; and,
C. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on December 4, 2019,
and after fully considering all oral and written testimony and facts and opinions
offered at the aforesaid public hearing, adopted this resolution.
SECTION 2. The Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares the
requested Municipal Code Amendment is exempt from review under the California
Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code § 21000 et seq. ("CEQA") and the State
CEQA Guidelines, 14 C.C.R. § 15000 et seq. because it would establish rules and procedures
to permit the operation of facilities already permitted to operate under existing law and make
revisions and clarifications to existing regulations and procedures related thereto. The
amendment would not have the potential to cause significant effects on the environment. It is
therefore categorically exempt from further CEQA review under CEQA Guidelines Sections
15301, 15305, and 15308.
SECTION 3. Having considered all of the oral and written evidence presented to it at
said public hearing, the Planning Commission further finds, determines and declares that:
A. The requested amendment is necessary and desirable for the development of the
community and is in the interests or furtherance of the public health, safety, and
general welfare. The State adopted SB 234 on September 8, 2019, which finds that
child daycare facilities are desirable and important to have available for working
parents due to the shortage of facilities throughout the state and therefore shall be
permitted by right in any residentially zoned property. The State mandates that all
local jurisdictions adopt the bill as quality and expansion of childcare environments is
a necessary need within the state of California. The proposed Municipal Code
Amendments introduce language that removes regulations and requirements on
large family daycare facilities as mandated by the State Legislature. The State finds
that parents prefer child daycares in a home environment, and is desirable for the
Resolution No.19-3113
Downey Planning Commission
development of the community and is in the interest of the public health, safety, and
general welfare.
B. The proposed amendment is in general conformance with the General Plan. The
proposed Municipal Code Amendments set forth review, approval, and operational
standards for a sensitive commercial use within the City. The proposed Municipal
Code Amendments set forth a use that will be permitted by right in all residentially
zoned properties without review, approval, or operational standards. General Plan
Program 1.3.2.2 — Adjust the codes, policies, and regulations in response to changes
in land use trends. The Municipal Code Amendment addresses a new requirement
through the State Legislature that removes cities or counties from placing restrictions
or regulations on this use. The proposed Municipal Code Amendments are
consistent with General Plan Policy 1.3.2.2 in that staff has evaluated the newer
legislation and proposes to amend its regulations so that the community is
maintaining compliance with state law. The proposed amendments will adjust current
regulations to provide residential properties the ability to operate large family daycare
uses, licensed by the State, within their home within the City.
SECTION 4. Based upon the findings set forth in Sections 1 through 3 of this
Resolution, the Planning Commission of the City of Downey hereby recommends that the City
Council revise the following regulations of Article IX of the Downey Municipal Code as provided
below. New text is identified with an underline and red font color and deleted text is shown with
a striket4rGugh; the amended regulations are proposed to read as follows:
I•I 1111 1. 111 W 1111 11
ii 1LII;gllJ;JIIIII ;'ll;piI 22UNSM
Family day care home, child Large family day care hornes
Large (9-14) P G11'- P G11- P G"- P shall -not r be within 1,000 feet
of -another large family day
Small (8 or fewer) P P P P GaFe4iome
_J
December 4, 2019 - Page 2
Resolution No.19-3113
Downey Planning Commission
Table 9.3.7 Mixed -Use Zone Ise Regulations
Use- W10_t_es_and FEx_ceP 1orfs
Family day care home, child
Large (9-14) _G F,
Small (8 or fewer) P
6,101061LIWIAERIDW3 , 0 , - 0
(r) Home occupations and-4arge fam*y_daaourlee-n4-44)-,Ghilcir-en) shall
o;* be allowed in 4he--GwRer-ocCu pied- unit:
SECTION 7 The Secretary shall certify the adoption of this Resolution.
I I f -i
Steven Dominguez, Chairman
City Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof, held on the 4th day of
December, 2019, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Frometa, Spathopoulos, Duarte and Domingu
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
I
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Owens
ABSTAIN,-
COMMISSIONERS:
None
Ot7ginafC-yy�igiledCay ,�)'Vlat`V (avanqgh
Mary Cavanagh, Secretary
City Planning Commission
Municipal Code Amendment (Large Family Daycare Regulations) - PLN -19-00155
December 4, 2019 - Page 3
MINUTES
DOWNEY CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER
COUNCILCITY '••
DOWNEY, CALIFORNIA
Chair Dominguez called the December 4, 2019, Regular Meeting of the Planning Commission to order at 6:30
p.m., at Downey City Hall, 11111 Brookshire Avenue, Downey, CA. After the flag salute, Secretary Cavanagh
called roll.
Dimitrios Spathopoulos, District 4
Nolveris Frometa, District 5
Miguel Duarte, District 1, Vice Chair
Steven Dominguez, District 3, Chair
Patrick Owens, District 2
OTHERS PRESENT: Aldo E. Schindler, Director of Community Development
Yvette Abich Garcia, City Attorney
Crystal Landavazo, City Planner
Guillermo Arreola, Principal Planner
Alfonso Hernandez, Senior Planner
Madalyn Welch, Assistant Planner
Mary Cavanagh, Secretary
Lieutenant Loughner, Downey Police Department
Fe
• 9W •• • • %FFOR -
REPORT ON CITY COUNCIL ACTION: The City Council approved a contract with Dixon Resources
Limited for the annual downtown parking assessment.
PUBLIC HEARINGS:
1. 11 it5 (Conditional Use •- Dominguez opened public hearing for •11 1 _ • Ms. Cavanagh-• proof of publication.
Senior Planner Alfonso Hernandez presented the request to amend an existing Conditional Use
Permit (CUP) PLN -13-00085, which approved live entertainment, alcohol sales, size of use, and a
night club use for "Club db Lounge", on property located at 8206 Firestone Boulevard, within the
Downtown Downey Specific Plan (DDSP). The applicant is seeking to expand the business area by
absorbing the east abutting tenant space at 8214 Firestone Boulevard. The new space will increase
the club floor area by 1,289 square feet. The majority of the expansion includes a bar area that will be
accessed by employees only. The business has recently obtained building permit approval to convert
existing open lounge area into additional restrooms. The combination of the proposed new bar area
and elimination of existing lounge area through a recent remodel will result in no net increase of
lounge area open to the public. Therefore, no changes are proposed for the amount of patrons
allowed within the building, or required parking. The night club will continue to comply under existing
conditions of approval, and continue to operate with an ABC (Alcohol Beverage Control) Type 48 (On
Sale General — Public Premises) License, and live entertainment. Staff also included changes to the
proposed hours of operation to be consistent with other businesses offering live entertainment in the
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
area. This application was presented to the Development Review Committee at which time the
Downey Police Department approved the Security Plan that included 15 security guards.
The Commissioners inquired about call; what time the live entertainment ends; security and calls for service
for the last three years.
Senior Planner Hernandez stated both are 30 -minutes before closing.
Downey Police Lieutenant Scott Loughner stated he only has data on the past year; within that time there
have been 124 calls to the area, although they cannot all be attributed to the Club db Lounge since there are
two other bars in the area. There have been 46 calls specific to the Club db Lounge, and the current owner
has been very cooperative with the Downey Police Department.
The Commissioners asked if Lt. Loughner considered 46 calls to be a high number and if are there standards
in place for the queue outside of the establishment.
Lieutenant Loughner stated the Club db Lounge security is good and they take care of the queue; 46 calls
would normally be considered high, however it is standard for this type of business; most of the calls were
municipal code violations and not major crimes.
The Commissioners asked about exterior lighting. City Planner Landavazo stated that they would be required
to comply with municipal code requirements.
Disclosures: Chair Dominguez stated he walked the area on Monday.
Applicant representative Adel Bazzi, Architect, said they will be using the adjacent space which has been
empty for the last two years for the expansion. The owner has been unable to lease the space because there
is no parking for that space. The current dance floor is very crowded and to improve safety, the business
owner decided to use the space for his club and relocate the bar area to free up more space for the dance
floor. He advised that the owner has submitted a photometric plan to the Planning Department.
The Commissioners discussed the following with Mr. Bazzi: Access to the space; size of the bar; queueing of
customers; entrances and exits to the establishment and the proposed redesign/configuration of the club
utilizing the adjacent space
Correspondence: An email was been received that was not included in the attachments; City Planner
Landavazo read said email into the record as follows:
From: Scott Silver [maflto:scott(Osilverlawla.com]
Sent: Friday, November 29, 2019 3:20 PM
To: Alfonso S. Hernandez
Cc: Elliot Sassover; jsassover�s� elevadocaoital.com; Aldo E. Schindler; h.gevork�an( clubdblounoe.com;
mansfield.collins@mansfieldcollinslaw.com
Subject: CUP Application PLN -19-00105 for Club DB Lounge - 8206 Firestone Expansion
Mr. Hernandez, I am counsel for, and a managing member of Downey Doo Wop LLC, the owner of
8124 — 8140 Firestone Blvd. (APN 6255-001-010). Downey Doo Wop LLC acquired 8124 — 8140
Firestone Blvd. on August 19, 2019 pursuant to the attached Grant Deed.
The attached Notice of Public Hearing was first brought to my attention by an email from the prior
owner of our property below the night before Thanksgiving (less than 48 hours ago).
We are writing to voice our support to this CUP application as we desire that Mr. Gevorkyan be
granted the right to expand his operations because, just like us and all other property owners and
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
users on Firestone Blvd., we believe that the Firestone Boulevard Gateway area is in great need of
new and expanded businesses of all sort being open for operation in as many street front spaces as
possible; the large gaps created by vacancies on Firestone Blvd. are scars upon Firestone Blvd.
which are slow to heal. Mr. Gevorkyan seems like a good operator and his Club DB Lounge appears
to us to be run in a safe and responsible manner. We hope to soon be joining Mr. Gevorkyan in
creating a number of new and vibrant tenancies along Firestone Blvd.
However, we do need to address the effect of the current CUP Application and the increased parking
requirements for the potentially expanded Club DB Lounge upon the Shared Parking Agreement
which was entered into at the direction of your Office by the Applicant in 2012 with an individual,
Salvatore Sabbatino, a copy of which is attached, which relates to rights of the Applicant (to satisfy a
prior issued CUP in 2012) to satisfy his parking requirements by parking on our property, 8124 —
8140 Firestone Blvd.
Two sections of the Shared Parking Agreement will need to be considered by the City at this time:
Section 2.2 of the Shared Parking Agreement provides that Mr. Gevorkyan guarantees that there will
be no substantial alteration in his Club DB Lounge use that will create a greater demand for parking
beyond the Licensed [68] Parking Spaces. Clearly, the current CUP application seeking to expand
his Club DB Lounge into an adjacent 1,289 square feet will create a greater demand for parking,
thereby creating a breach of the Shared Parking Agreement.
Section 3 of the Shared Parking Agreement provides that the Shared Parking Agreement may
terminate if the City of Downey (1) determines that the shared parking is no longer required or (2)
approves replacement parking.
On or about July 31, 2019 1 inquired with the Director of Community Development of the City of
Downey, Mr. Aldo Schindler, regarding parking requirements for the Club DB Lounge. Mr. Schindler
informed me that the Club DB Lounge could simply purchase an unlimited number of replacement
parking spaces in perpetuity from the City of Downey by way of paying a $200 per parking space
annual parking fee. With regard to the 68 parking spaces at our property, this would mean $13,600
annually which is an increase of only $2,800 over the $10,800 annually which Mr. Gevorkyan already
pays under the Shared Parking Agreement.
As Mr. Schindler is aware, my partners and I are in the process of redeveloping our property with all
new tenants. The Shared Parking Agreement serves to create a problem for the redevelopment of
our property in that it creates a great uncertainty for us and our prospective tenants and lenders
regarding parking demand and use on our property's available parking spaces. In turn, if our
redevelopment is stymied then the development of the Firestone Boulevard Gateway area desired
by the City of Downey will be stunted, at least as to the block upon which our property is situated.
The current CUP application creates an opportunity for the City of Downey to undo a harm done
seven years ago to a neighboring property and its potential for future re -development. During our
sale escrow in July 2019, Mr. Sabbatino informed me and my partners that he had no recollection or
understanding that he had signed any agreement which would create a shared parking agreement
which would cloud title and create a problem and uncertainty in perpetuity; in fact, Mr. Sabbatino
thought he simply had a "handshake agreement" with Mr. Gevorkyan which could be terminated at
any time. Mr. Sabbatino's family members who were co -members of the owner of our property in
2012 Sabbatino Centers, LLC were in fact shocked to learn of the very existence of the recorded
Shared Parking Agreement for the first time in July 2019 and informed us that Mr. Sabbatino was
elderly and confused and had no authority to sign the Shared Parking Agreement in his individual
capacity as he wasn't the owner of the property at the time it was signed (Sabbatino Centers, LLC
was).
-3-
. , 0 is me a
!- - • i l • -
Accordingly, we hereby request that the City of Downey condition any approval of CUP
Application PLN -19-00105 upon a termination of the Shared Parking Agreement based upon:
(1) the expansion of the Club DB Lounge creating a greater demand for parking which will constitute
a breach of Section 2.2 of the Shared Parking Agreement,
(2) a determination by the City of Downey that the shared parking is no longer required under the
Shared Parking Agreement; and
(3) an approval by the City of Downey of replacement parking for the Shared Parking Agreement's
68 parking spaces.
Thank you for your time in reviewing the facts and documentation we have provided above and
attached and for considering our above request.
PS Please change the address records in the Planning Dept. to the address below so that we
receive mailings from your office timely in the future. Thank you.
Downey Doo Wop LLC
10573 W. Pico Blvd., Suite 218
Los Angeles, CA 90064
Scoff it
Silver
hone (31 0) 684-3611
Public Comments: Jorge Savar (sp) said he created a Downey Community Facebook page and people have
been posting and complaining about the Club db Lounge approach to get patrons to leave once the business
is closed for the night. He feels they should not be heavy handed with the customers.
Jonathan Sassover, 442 S. Doheny Drive, Beverly Hills, is the owner of the property that shares parking with
the lounge. He spoke in favor of the expansion of the lounge and would like to discuss shared parking.
Mr. Bazzi stated they would like to have a conversation with the owner of the shared parking at a later date.
Once they come to an agreement they will present it to the Planning Staff.
Chair Dominguez called for a break at 7:39 p.m. and called the meeting to order at 7:48 p.m.
City Attorney Garcia stated the shared parking agreement is a separate civil matter between two property
owners and not a matter for the Planning Commission.
Staff recommended approval of the request for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN -19-00105).
Chair Dominguez closed the public hearing.
The Commissioners discussed outside lighting requirements, ADA compliance, crowd control outside of the
business, and security. Lieutenant Loughner read the conditions of the security plan. The Commissioners
also discussed the time that the live entertainment shall cease. The Commissioners discussed modifying the
hours for live entertainment to cease at 1:30 a.m. in order to conform to the surrounding businesses.
Chair Dominguez reopened the hearing.
Mr. Bazzi stated they are trying to work with the City and are giving up hours of operation during the week,
making aesthetic improvements to the adjacent space and request to maintain the existing hours for live
entertainment until 1:45 a.m. as changing them will hurt the business.
Chair Dominguez stated they are not asking them to stop music, they can still have ambient music after 1:30
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
a.m. Mr. Bazzi explained that they could lose up to 20 percent of the business by taking away the 15 minutes.
The owner is currently giving up four days to comply with Staff's recommendation, but reducing the live
entertainment by 15 minutes will dramatically affect the business.
Adam Sol®rzano (sp), Manager at Club db Lounge, stated that alcohol is cut off at 1:30 a.m. while dancing
goes to 1:45 a.m.; cutting off the music at 1:30 a.m. will drastically harm the business. There are very few
patrons between 9:00 p.m. and 11:45 p.m.; if they have to stop dancing at 1:30 a.m. it will destroy the
business.
Mansfield Collins, Attorney for Club db Lounge, stated the club business has changed and the clientele will go
to a nearby city that stays open later, it is extremely important for the night club to have live entertainment
until 1:45 a.m.
Chair Dominguez closed the hearing.
The Commissioners questioned how the business would lose 20 percent business when alcohol has already
been cut off at 1:30 a.m.
Commissioner Frometa stated since they are reducing the amount of days they would operate, he feels they
should be allowed to have the live entertainment until 1:45 a.m.
Vice Chair Duarte stated the other businesses that stop live entertainment at 1:30 a.m. are restaurants that
operate as supper clubs and do not compare to a night club such as Club db Lounge that is strictly a night
club and he feels that carries a lot of weight. Furthermore, there is a very good relationship between Club db
Lounge and the Police Department.
Chair Dominguez stood firm in his opinion that there needs to be uniformity in their requirements.
City Attorney Garcia stated the Commissioners are at a 2-2 split and they have to come to a resolution, or the
application will be denied.
Commissioner Spathopoulos said they don't want businesses losing out because of a decision they make.
City Planner Landavazo clarified that dancing is part of the City's definition of live entertainment; so if the
music stops so does the dancing, that is part of the applicant's concern that they will lose business.
The Commissioners discussed the option to continue the meeting due to a deadlock; continuing the
application to a later date in January would allow Commissioner Owens to view the video and vote on the
item.
Chair Dominguez reopened the public hearing and asked the applicant(s) if they would be willing to continue
to a later date in January.
Mr. Collins advised the Commission that the 15 minute reduction to the hours for live entertainment would be
detrimental to the business, and if an agreement cannot be made, the owner will have to withdraw the
application.
Mr. Bazzi reminded the Commission that if the application is withdrawn, the adjacent space will remain vacant
with no modification to the fagade.
Hayk Gevorkyan, owner of Club db Lounge, stated they do a great job of escorting everyone outside from
1:45 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. and everyone is gone by 2:00 a.m. He explained how removing 15 minutes of live
entertainment can kill the business as other night clubs they compete with outside of Downey that remain
open until 3:00 a.m. The other businesses in the Downtown area start earlier in the day and sell food,
-5-
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
whereas the night club business starts late and there are no food sales to help generate income. The
business is affected by the length of time the customer will stay at the club. If it is too short, they will go
elsewhere; half of the business is repeat business.
Mr. Sol6rzano, stated the business is a night club and dancing is the primary portion of the business; cutting
off dancing at 1:30 a.m. is a big deal in the very competitive night club industry.
Public Comment:
Jorge Havar (sp) is concerned if 15 minutes is enough time for patrons to wind down before leaving the
establishment and believes the applicant should show proof that revenue is reduced.
Chair Dominguez asked if the applicant would be in favor to continue the item. Mr. Bazzi stated they are not in
favor. There is a major concern due to building code changes on January 1, 2020.
Chair Dominguez called for a break at 8:52 p.m. and called the meeting to order at 8:50 p.m.
Mr. Bazzi stated if they are not able to keep the 1:45 a.m. end time they will withdraw the application. He did
point out if they do walk away, live entertainment will continue to end at 1:45 a.m. seven days a week. Since
they are reducing their business hours during the week, they are asking for an exception to be able to remain
open until 1:45 a.m. on weekend nights. Also, the new Building Code will go into effect in January causing
problems with the current renovations.
Director Schindler suggested holding a special meeting before the end of the calendar year so that all five
Commissioners can be present. Mr. Collins added the business loss of 20 percent is conservative. What
they perceive will happen is there will be a snowball effect of the regular customers leaving and going
somewhere else which will adversely impact the business.
Commissioner Spathopoulos reminded them the City is not losing anything; the applicant is submitting a
proposal. He did research during the break and found that they are the only establishment that is allowed to
have live entertainment until 1:45 a.m.
Chair Dominguez closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Spathopoulos stated he feels the 1:30 a.m. will hurt the business in the long run. The applicant
is currently operating at 1:45 a.m. and he is the only full night club in the City of Downey, and he feels that is
important since he is not selling food like the other establishments.
Vice Chair Duarte stated he understands night club patrons do not show up until later in the night. He said if
they do not grant the 1:45 a.m. cut off time the business will withdrawal and will keep the 1:45 a.m. they
currently are allowed. He also stated they will improve the appearance of the fagade. In addition, without the
sale of food they need the extra 15 minutes of live entertainment.
Commissioner Frometa stated he does not see a reason to modify their hours since they are doing a remodel
and there haven't been any issues caused by the hours they are currently allowed to operate.
The Commissioners discussed modifying the conditions of approval.
City Planner Landavazo reviewed the modified the conditions as follows:
12) The site shall remain in conformance with this request and the approved set of plans
ecifl� elevations proposed on sheet A-3.9 irr dans date stamped ,June 27, 2019.
This includes completion of and final -sign off of building permits for the new restrooms in
southwest portion of the business.
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
33) A photometric plan must be included as part of the plan check submittal. The
illumination plan must clearly indicateparkingareas willprovide lighting
for safety of patrons and the surrounding area. The outdoor areas along Firestone
Boulevardand Lorenabe • •aspart• : photometric plan.
34) Customer queuing at Firestone Boulevard shall be kept against the building and shall
• block ADAaccessibility on publicsidewalk.oftemporaryqueue-line
rope is permitted, subject to the approval of the Planning Division and Police
Department.
4345) The owner/applicant shall impose enforce a dress code that shall not permit patrons to
wear the following: Gang attire/colors, baggy pants, bandanas, back packs, and/or caps that
are worn backwards.
r •'
46 48) Upon determination by the Chief of Police that the operation of the business requires
additional on-site security, the applicant shall submit and obtain approval of a revised
security plan to the Chief of Police. A minimum of fifteen (L5) securitv guards must be
Provided and may be increased or decreased as the Chief of Police determines is
necessary. The security plan shall be submitted to the Police Department within fourteen
(14) days of being requested and. Should the Police Department request any additional
information or modifications, the business owner/permittee shall submit said revisions within
forty-eight (48) hours of notification.
It was moved by Vice Chair Duarte, seconded by Commissioner Frometa, and passed by a 4-0-1 vote, with
Commissioner Owens absent, thereby approving the request for a Conditional Use Permit (PLN -19-00105)
with modified conditions as stated.
2. LN-19-00155JZone Text Amendment): Chair Dominguez opened the public hearing for PLN -19-
00155 and Ms. Cavanagh affirmed proof of publication.
City Planner Crystal Landavazo presented the request to amend various sections of Article IX of the Downey
Municipal Code to comply with new State Legislation related to Large Family Daycare uses in residentially
zoned properties. The new legislation states that large family daycares are to be treated the same as small
daycares, and allowed to operate within residential zones. The Planning Commission will no longer receive
applications for large daycares. There are no maximum numbers allowed and no space requirements
between daycare locations. These changes will take effect on January 1, 2020.
Disclosures: None.
Correspondence: None.
Public Comments: None.
Chair Dominguez closed the public hearing.
The Commissioners had no issues or comments.
It was moved by Commissioner Spathopoulos, and seconded by Commissioner Frometa, and passed by a
4-0-1 vote, with Commissioner Owens absent, thereby recommending the City Council approve Zone Text
Amendment (PLN -19-00155).
NON -AGENDA PUBLIC COMMENTS: None
-7-
Planning Commission
December 4, 2019 Minutes
4. Appr val of s FIMust 21, 2019
5. ARproval of +►m Novemberi
It was moved by Commissioner Spathopoulos and seconded by Commissioner Frometa, and passed by a
vote of 3-0-2, to approve the Minutes from August 21, 2019, with Vice Chair Duarte abstaining and
Commissioner Owens absent from item 4 of the consent calendar. Item 5 of the consent calendar passed
with a vote of 4-0-1, with Commissioner Owens absent, to approve the Minutes from November 6, 2019,
meeting.
OTHER BUSINESS: None.
STAFF MEMBER COMMENTS: Director of Community Development Schindler stated Monday, December
9` at 6:30 p.m. the City of Downey will host a Housing Resource Fair at the Columbia Memorial Space
Center.
ADJOURNMENT: Chair Dominguez adjourned the meeting at 10:08 p.m., to Wednesday, December 18,
2019, at 6:30p.m., at Downey City Hall, 11111 Brookshire Ave.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 15th day of January, 2020.
Miguel Duarte, Vice Chairman
City Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing is a true copy of a Resolution adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Downey at a regular meeting thereof held on the 15th day of January 2020 by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
COMMISSIONERS:
Owens, Frometa, Spathopoulos and Duarte
NOES:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
ABSENT:
COMMISSIONERS:
Dominguez
ABSTAIN:
COMMISSIONERS:
None
Orr it aff signed y .`,nary C avan agl
Mary Cavanagh, Secretary
City Planning Commission
I
A"A
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
AUTHENTICATED
ELECTRONIC LEGAL MATERIAL
CHAPTER 244
[Approved by Governor September 5, 2019. Filed with Secretary
of State September 5, 2019.]
LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
SB 234, Skinner. Family daycare homes.
Under existing law, the California Child Day Care Facilities Act, the State
r
• rem IM
Wor dp1"jill-d
home.
This bill would instead require a large family daycare home to be treated
as a residential use of property for purposes of all local ordinances.
Existing law makes void every provision in a written instrument entered
encumbrance, leasing, or mortgaging of the real property for use or
occupancy as a family daycare home for children and every restriction or
as a family daycare home.
This bill would also make void an attempt to deny, restrict, or encumber
I aSing, ormortuaging of real ro e for use or o
a dwelling unit wn a covered multifamily dwelling in which the
applicants for family daycare home licenses that specified housing
discrimination remedies are available to a family dayeare home provider,
who is claiming, that any
of these protections have been denied.
a
Attachment "C"
C. 244 —2—
Existing law prohibits a local jurisdiction ftorn. imposing a business
license, fee, or tax for the privilege of operating a small family daycare
home.
This bill would extend that prohibition to large family daycare homes.
Existing law requires the State Fire Marshal to adopt building standards
,w0intgulations relating to the fire and life safety..aystems in family daycare
provider homes.
This bill would require the State Fire Marshal to update those regulations
2W,1
to changes in these provisions, The bill would also require the State Fire
Marshal to issue guidance on implementing the provisions prior to the
publication of regulations, but not later than January 1, 2021, and would
authorize guidance to be issued annually thereafter in years when the
speced regulations are not updated.
The bill would also make technical and conforming changes.
SECTION 1. Section 1596.72 of the Health and Safety Code is amended
to read:
1596.72. The Legislature finds all of the following:
(a) That child dayeare facilities can contribute positively to a child's
emotional, cognitive, and educational development.
(b) That it is the intent of this state to provide a comprehensive, quality
system for licensing child daycare facilities to ensure a quality childcare
environment.
(c) That this system of licensure requires a special understanding of the
unique characteristics and needs of the children served by child daycare
facilities.
(d) That it is the intent of the Legislature to establish within the State
Department of Social Services an organizational structure to separate
licensing of child daycare facilities from those facty types administered
under Chapter 3 (commencing with Section 1500).
(e) That good quality childcare services are an essential service for
working parents.
(f) California has a tremendous shortage of regulated childcare, and only
a small fraction of families who need childcare have it. Parents should be
able to support their families without having to sacrifice their child's
well-being. I
(g) With childcare, families have more options forjobs and education to
improve their prospects. Good, affordable childeare gives children a strong
start and creates opportunities for families and communities.
Section 1596.73 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to
read:
1596.73. The purposes of this act are to:
U.
-3- C. 244
(a) Streamline the administration of childcare licensing and thereb
increase the efficiency and effectiveness of this system.
(b) Encourage the development of licensing staff with knowledge anle,
understanding of children and childcare needs.
(c) Provide providers of childcare with technical assistance abou
licensing requirements.
(d) Enhance consumer awareness of licensing requirements and th4
benefits of licensed childcare.
(e) Recognize that affordable, quality licensed childcare is critical to thi
well-being of parents and children in this state.
(f) Promote the development and expansion of regulated childcare.
Section 1596.78 of the Health and Safety Code is amended t•
read:
1596.78. (a) "Family dayeare home" means a facility that regularl
provides care, protection, and supervision for 14 or fewer children, in th
provider's own home, for periods of less than 24 hours per day, while th
a large famil,.,,Lda- ome 0)
,care home
a small family daycare home.
(b) "Large family daycare home" means a facility that provides c
Lf&,r_7_to_�4chi�ldren jnQUiiincluding chil:el
under 10 years of age who reside at the home, as set forth in Secti
1597.465 and as defined in regulations.
r
(c) "Small family daycare home" means a facility that provides ca
QrotecQ
and as defined in regulations.
(d) A small family daycare home or large family daycare home includ
"-f gili dwilijig- a townhouse, a dwelling unit withinj
TWI IIIIN
- T%IPM74
the underlying zoning allows for residential uses. A small family daycaj
and includes a dwelling or a dwelling unit that is rented, leased, or owne
SEC. 4. Section 1597.30 of the Health and Safety Code is amended
read:
1597.30. The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The Legislature has a responsibility to ensure the health and safe
of children in family homes that provide daycare.
(b) 'I'licre is an extrenic shortage of regulated fanifly daycare lionies i
California, and the nitinber lias i decreased significantly since 2008.
(c) Tliere contintics to be a growing need for child dayeare facilities d
L x
*&Lufir_otw._bTi4jwrnber of working -,rarents. Parents need childcare so thl
can work and attend school, and so their children can thrive.
(d) Many parents prefer childcare located in their neighborhoods in fami
homes.
(e) There should be a variety of childcare settings, including regulati
family daycare homes, as suitable choices for parents.
M I
C. 244 ---4—
(f) The licensing program to be operated by the state should be cos
effective, streamlined, and simple to administer in order to ensure adequat
care for children placed in family daycare homes, while not placing undu
burdens on the providers.
(g) The state should maintain an efficient program of regulating fami
daycare homes that ensures the provision of adequate protection, supervisio
anI guidance to children in their homes.
(h) The state has a responsibility to promote the development an
expansion of regulated family daycare homes to care for children
residential settings.
SEC. 5. Section 1597.40 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
SEC.6. Section 1597.40 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to rea
1597.40. (a) Itis the intent of the Legislature that family daycare home
for children should be situated in normal residential surroundings so as t•
give children the home environment that is conducive to healthy and sa
development. It is the public policy of this state to provide children in
family daycare home the same home environment as provided in a tradition
home setting.
(b) The Legislature declares this policy to be of statewide concern wi
the purpose of occupying the field. This act, the state building code, an•
the fire code, and regulations promulgated pursuant to those provision
shall preempt local laws, regulations, and rules governing the use an
occupancy of family daycare homes. Local laws, regulations, or rules sha
daycare home, including, but not limited to, precluding the operation of
family daycare home.
SEC. 7. Section 1597.41 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to rea
1597.41. (a) Every provision in a written instrument relating to re
property that purports to restrict the conveyance, encumbrance, leasing,
mortgaging of the real property for use or occupancy as a family daycar
home is void, and every restriction in that written instrument as to the us
or occupancy of the property as a family daycare home is void.
(b) An attempt to deny, restrict, or encumber the conveyance, leasi
or mortgaging of real property for use or occupancy as a family dayc
home is void. A restriction related to the use or occupancy of the prope
as a family daycare home is void. A property owner or manager shall n•
refuse to sell or rent, or refuse to negotiate for the sale or rental o
otherwise make unavailable or deny, a detached single-family dwelli g
n-Tit.witV,rr-A-dwelh-tg. or a dWellina Unit wi
(c) Except as provided in subdivision (d), a restriction, whether by w
of covenant, contract, condition upon use or occupancy, or by transfer•
F4 MMMUMMMO UP
94
-5- C. 244
Z!
C. 244 —6-
1597.45. (a) The use • a home as a small • large family daycare home
shall be considered a residential use • property and a use by right • the
[�urposes of all local ordinances, including, but not limited to, zoning
ordinances.
(b) A local jurisdiction shall not impose a business license, fee, or tax
for the privilege of operating a small or large family daycare home.
(c) Use
• a home as a small or large family ♦. home shall not
constitute a change of occupancy for purposes of • 1.5 (commencing
with
• 179 10) of Division 13 (State Housing Law) • for purposes •'
•; building codes.
(d) A small • large family daycare home shall not be • to the
provisions • Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) • the Public
Resources Code.
(e) The provisions of this chapter do not preclude a city, county, or other
• public entity from f• restrictions on building heights, setback, or
imensions of a famil da care home as long as those restrictions are
JWt5
SM.
daycare home. This chapter also does not prohibit or restrict the abateme
of nuisances by a city, county, or city and county. However, the ordinance
or nuisance abatement shall not distinguish family daycare homes from
�.v�t�herwi�seyrovided
in this chapter.
(f) For purposes • this chapter, "small family daycare home or large
family daycare home" includes a detached • dwelling, a
towrNiouse- a d
rUSIUMILIM LSCb_._ri MIMI RUM
is where the family daycare provider resides, and-micludes a dwelling or
dwelling unit that is rented, leased, or owned.
SEC. 10. Section 1597.455 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to
read:
1597.455. (a) A small family daycare home shall not be subject to
Article I (commencing with Section 13 100) •, Article 2 (commencing with
Section 13140) • Chapter I of Part 2 of Division 12, except� that a small
family daycare home shall contain a fire extinguisher and smokeAetector
device that meet standards established by the State Fire Marshal. ;
(b) A small family daycare home for children shall have one or more
in Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 13260) of Part 2 of Division 12.
The
1•. shall account for the presence • these detectors during
inspections.
SEC. 11. Section 1597.46 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
94
-7— C. 244
SEC. 12. Section 1597.46 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to
read:
1597.46. (a) A large family dayeare home shall abide by all standards,
in addition to the requirements of the State Uniform Building Standards
Code, that are specifically designed to promote fire and life safety in large
family daycare homes. The State Fire Marshal shall adopt separate building
standards speccally relating to the subject of fire and life safety in family
daycare homes, which shall be published in Title 24 of the California Code
and shall include, but not be limited to, all of the following:
(1) The requirement that a large family daycare home contain a fire
extbWA-liO.er 'IT
established by the State Fire Marshal.
(2) Specification as to the number of required exits from the home.
(3) Specification as to the floor or floors on which childcare may be
provided and the number of required exits on each floor.
(b) A large family daycare home for children shall have one or more
in Chapter 8 (commencing with Section 1326 0) of Part 2 of Division 12.
The department shall account for the presence of these detectors during
inspections.
(c) Enforcement of this section shall be in accordance with Sections
13145 and 13146. A city, county, city and county, or district shall not adopt
or enforce a building ordinance or local rule or regulation relating to the
subject of fire and life safety in large family daycare homes that is
r1721MMI 11 07M ro FrITI-T-1VO "11 Wl"M 01,11 1
SEC. 13. Section 1597.47 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
SEC. 14. Section 1597.54 of the Health and Safety Code is amended to
read:
1597.54. (a) All family daycare homes for children, shall apply for a
li
a valid and unexpired license to operate as a family daycare home for
children under other provisions of law shall be deemed to have a license
V -tr *e irwx-cired te-aff of tYe lice-rse- at-whi6. ti-ne a nex?
ITIVW111IM-1 MOM•111127"74TIMe 1OMWWR i
NOWN =-NITIMON WINi. =- 1, 1
U-WI-V#u 1W.1 its I I lot oil
ftwnished by the department, which shall include, but not be limited to, all
of the following:
(1) A brief statement confirming that the applicant is financially secure
to operate a family daycare home for children. The department shall not
require any other specific or detailed financial disclosure.
(2) (A) Evidence that the small family daycare home contains a fire
extinguisher or smoke detector device, or both, that meets standards
established by the State Fire Marshal under Section 1597.455, or evidence
94
Ch. 244 —8—
and shall include the date and time of the drills.
(3) The fingerprints of any applicant of a family daycare home license,
er . 1' f_i: i 1: '-Undzr-�m4b)-of Section-L596
Mal CHIPWOR are I][]'
certificate, as defined in subdivision (f) of Section 121525, that indicates
freedom from infectious tuberculosis as set forth in Section 121525.
(5) Commencing September 1, 2016, evidence of current immunity or
exemption ftom immunity, as described in Section 1597.622, for the
applicant and any other person who provides care and supervision to the
children.
(6) Evidence satisfactory to the department of the ability of the applicant
to comply with this chapter and Chapter 3.4 (commencing with Section
1596.70) and the regulations adopted pursuant to those chapters.
(7) Evidence satisfactory to the department that the applicant and all
11;W4=11iff Mew
OWN
1IMUTIRTHOW-11,
(8) Other information as required by the department for the proper
administration and enforcement of the act.
(c) Failure of the applicant to cooperate with the licensing agency in the
completion of the application shall result in the denial of the application.
Failure to cooperate means that the information described in this section
ovided
in the form requested by the licensing agency, or both.
SEC. 15. Section 1597.543 of the Health and Safety Code is repealed.
SEC. 16. Section 1597.543 is added to the Health and Safety Code, to
read:
1597.543. (a) The State Fire Marshal shall update the building and fire
and fire safety, including, but not limited to, Sections 1597.455 and 1597.46�
I ML—C." ixt'- I
in the next Title 19 and Title 24 CCR adoption cycle. i
(b) Prior to the publication of the updates required by subdivision (a);
I III(* I rtra-r ja-riaV I _2-ji2,1e,9t.?fe Fire lfarsVA s.kall issue mAda-r
1 4, 1 4 -
LY!
-9- Ch. 244
1111111111
I I in a I IMMI WK
BM
x
m