HomeMy WebLinkAbout1987-02-10; City Council; 8882; GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT TO AMEND THE LAND USE ELEMENT TO INLCUDE THE ENCOURAGEMENT OF CHILDCARE IN THE COMMUNITY AS A GOAL OF THE GENERAL PLAN GPA|LU 86-4 | CITY OF CARLSBAD|hl
2 0 5
=! 0 z 3 0 0
a
further actions are listed in the staff report of July 30, 19t attached .
When this item was discussed by the Planning Commission sever:
representatives of business and developer interests spoke out
against the proposed General Plan Amendment.' concern that this amendment could result in additional develol fees. A substantial number of people connected with the loca: school systems and childcare facilities spoke in favor of the
proposed amendment and stressed the need for additional childc facilities in Carlsbad.
After discussing this matter the Commission voted to approve 1 proposed General Plan Amendment by a vote of 5-2.
They expressed
0 0
f f)f A
Page 2 of Agenda Bill No. Frr2L
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that this project will not
cause any significant environmental impacts and, therefore, hat issued a Negative Declaration, dated June 28, 1986. A copy of the environmental documents is on file in the Planning Department .
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed General Plan Amendment will have no fiscal impact However, additional studies by staff would require a substanti; amount of time and effort.
EXH I B I T S
1. Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572 2. Staff Report dated July 30, 1986 3. Staff Report dated August 13, 1986 w/attachments
4. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, dated July 30, 1986.
5. Planning Commission Meeting Minutes, dated August 13, 1986.
6. "Fortune" Magazine article reprint, dated February 16, 198:
'?ti
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 2572
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CIT'E CAKLSBAD, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT TO THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF T€
GENERAL PLAN BY THE ADDITION OF WORDING TO ENCOURA(
ESTABLISHMENT OF CHILDCARE FACILITIES AS A GOAL OF GENERAL PLAN. APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
CASE NO. : GPA/LU 86-4
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did, on the 30th {
July, 1986 on the 13th day of August, 1986, hold a duly not.
public hearing as prescribed by law to consider said reques'
WHEREAS, at said public hearing, upon hearing and
considering all testimony and arguments, if any, of all per
desiring to be heard, said Commission considered all factor
relating to the General Plan Amendment.
NOW, THEREFORE, RE IT HEREBY RESOLVED by the Plann
Commission of the City of Carlsbad, as follows:
A) That the above recitations are true and correct.
B) That the Land Use Element is amended to read as follow
1) Item I, on Page 6, be added to read:
"I. Encourage and promote the establishment of ch facilities in safe and convenient locations
throughout the community to accommodate the g demand for childcare in the community caused
demographic, economic and social forces. 11
I
C) That based on the evidence presented at the public hea the Commission recommends APPROVAL of GPA/LU 86-4, bas the following findings:
Findings:
1) The amendment will promote the availability of childca the community.
2) This action will not cause any significant environment
impact and a Negative Declaration has been issued by t
Planning Director on June 28, 1986 and recommended for
approval by the Planning Commission on July 30, 1986.
#fIi
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
l2 13
I*
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
e e
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED at a regular meeting
Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad, California, he
the 13th day of August, 1986, by the following vote, to wit
AYES : Commissioners: Marcus, Schramm, McFadden Holmes and McBane.
NOES : Chairman Schlehuber ii Commissioner Hall
ABSENT : None.
ABSTAIN : None.
3. h4
CLARENCE SCHLEHUBER, Chai
CARLSBAD PLANNING COMMISS
ATTEST :
[&A& MICHAEL J. HOLZMILLER PLANNING DIKECTOR p
PC KESO NO. 2572 -2-
0 0
t7 ?A
STAFF REPORT E
PATE: JULY 30, 1986
TO : PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: GPA/LU 86-4 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - A General Plan
Amendment to amend the Land Use Element to include tf
encouragement of childcare in the community as a goal
the General Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of the NegatiT
Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolut~
NO. 2572 recommending APPROVAL of GPA/LU 86-4 to the City COUI
based on the findings contained therein.
11. BACKGROUND
Recently, staff was directed by the Planning Commission to
examine the issue of childcare facilities in Carlsbad. Varioi
governmental agencies were contacted and statistical data was
gathered which indicated that the lack of childcare facilities
becoming a nationwide, as well as a local problem. Basically
this is a consequence of a number of social changes. These
include:
* In 60% of families, both spouses are employed out of
economic necessity.
* Single parent families have doubled in the last decad
and will continue to increase in the future.
* Almost 60% of single mothers with children under six
work.
* An estimated 5 million children under the age of ten
are unsupervised when they come home from school in t
afternoon.
* The U.S. is experiencing another baby boom. Present1
the population of children 0-14 is 5.7 million and wi
reach 6.6 million by 1995.
(Please see the attached Statistical Profile ((Exhibit "A"
dated June 10, 1986)) compiled by Childcare Resource Servi
for information relating directly to Carlsbad.)
rr it 0 0
In response to th‘is need, staff is proposing the following
statement be added as Item I to page 6 of the Land Use Element
(Goals) of the General Plan.
“Encourage and promote the establishment of
childcare facilities in safe and convenient
locations throughout the community to accom-
modate the growing demand for childcare in the
community caused by demographic, economic and
social forces. n
111. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1) Is the addition of a childcare facility goal to the L;
Use Element necessary and desirable?
2) Is the proposed goal consistent with other elements oj
the General Plan?
Discussion
AS indicated on the attached Statistical Profile (Childcare
Resource Service), the Carlsbad sub-regional area has 473
childcare spaces available to serve a child population of 3,50:
needihg care. This figures out to a ratio of one childcare sp.
for every 7.4 children. The available data addresses only
children living ‘in the area, not those brought to the City by
parents working here. Figures on employees working for school
and state and federal agencies were not available. The County
ratio of one childcare space to four children indicates a wide
disparity with the City ratio of 1:7 which is significantly
lower. The City permits small family day care centers serving
six or fewer children to be operated by right in the R-1 zones
however, figures on the number of children served are not
available. With the expanding growth in the area, as well as
increasing number of commercial and industrial projects, staff
believes the need for childcare facilities will continue to
intensify.
The legal definition of a child is anyone under 18 years of ag
and there is no legal age at which a child can remain at home
unsupervised. As currently practiced in the City, if a police
responds to a call regarding unsupervised children, he must UI
his own discretion as to whether or not there is a problem.
Presently, the City’s juvenile officer responds to 3-4 such ci
a month. Besides the issue of the younger child, the police
department believes activities for teenagers should also be
encouraged to promote healthy activities for this age group
rather than “teenagers hanging out at the mall“.
-2-
0 e
" I)
Staff believes the proposed goal is compatible with all other
elements of the General Plan and is also in conformance with
Zoning Ordinance. Staff feels the proposed goal will be of
benefit to the community by recognizing a common need and
attempting to alleviate the growing shortage of childcare in
City.
Staff hopes that with the establishment of the childcare goal
the Land Use Element that developers and businesses will
recognize the need for childcare facilities and be encouraged
provide these facilities on their own initiative. However, t
Planning Commission may feel that more than a statement in th
General Plan is needed. They may consider possible further
actions listed below, If the Planning Commission feels any o
these actions are appropriate they can formulate them in a
recommendation to the City Council.
A) conduct a formal needs assessment. (This would be
necessary to validate the City's position to
developers. 1
1. The needs assessment should address: population
distribution, labor force participation, any
planning or zoning obstacles, levels of state an1
local funding, existing ordinances, amount and t:
of childcare needed including the ill child, lev1
of community awareness and support for childcare
parental preferences.
B) Establish a childcare task force which could be compc
of commission members, staff , childcare providers,
developers, and other community/governmental agencier
c) Coordinate childcare programs with other governmental
agencies.
D) Participate in latchkey programs with Parks and
Recreation, Boy's and Girl's Club, and elementary
schools whereby Parks and Recreation and Boy's and
Girl's Club would operate after-school programs on
school grounds.
E) Establish a public awareness/publicity program and
encourage childcare resource and referral services.
F) Apply for State and Federal grants to establish/opera
childcare facilities in the City.
G) Adopt an ordinance requiring developers of large
commercial, industrial or office projects to provide
childcare facilities or pay childcare impact fees. T
cities of San Francisco, Santa Monica and Concord hav
implemented childcare ordinances, see Exhibit "B",
-3-
'f >A e 0
I) Offer incentives for developers to provide childcare
facilities and services such as:
1) Reduced business license fees
2 1 Waive business license fee for non-prof it
organizations with childcare programs
for childcare
if it is part of a larger center or business
3) Permit increased site coverage if space is us
4 1 Modify parking requirements for childcare are
The Commission should be aware that it would require a
significant amount of staff time to implement some of these
options.
IV. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that there will be no
significant environmental impacts resulting from this project
and has issued a Negative Declaration on June 28, 1986.
ATTACHMENTS
1) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572
2) Exhibits "A", "B", and "C", dated June 10, 1986
3) Environmental Document
AML: bn
6/13/86
-4-
’< IA 0 0 d+
//- \ CL STAFF REPORT
‘I 91..\,’ 8
DATE: AUGUST 13, 1986
TO: PLANNING COMMISSION
FROM: PLANNING DEPARTMENT
SUBJECT: GPA/LU 86-4 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - A General Plan
Amendment to amend the Land Use Element to include the
encouragement of childcare in the community as a goal
the General Plan.
I. RECOMMENDATION
That the Planning Commission recommend APPROVAL of the Negative
Declaration issued by the Planning Director and ADOPT Resolutic
No. 2572 recommending APPROVAL of GPA/LU 86-4 to the City Counc
based on the findings contained therein.
11. BACKGROUND
Recently, staff was directed by the Planning Commission to
examine the issue of childcare facilities in Carlsbad. Various
governmental agencies were contacted and statistical data was
gathered which indicated that the lack of childcare facilities
becoming a nationwide, as well as a local problem. Basically,
this is a consequence of a number of social changes. These
include:
* In 60% of families, both spouses are employed out of
economic necessity.
* Single parent families have doubled in the last decade
and will continue to increase in the future.
* Almost 60% of single mothers with children under six
work.
* An estimated 5 million children under the age of ten
are unsupervised when they come home from school in t
afternoon.
* The U.S. is experiencing another baby boom. Present1
the population of children 0-14 is 5.7 million and wi
reach 6.6 million by 1995.
(Please see the attached Statistical Profile ( (Exhibit “A“
dated June 10, 1986)) compiled by Childcare Resource Servi
for information relating directly to Carlsbad.)
‘7 IA e a
In response to this need, staff is proposing the following
statement be added as Item I to page 6 of the Land Use Element
(Goals) of the General Plan.
“Encourage and promote the establishment of
childcare facilities in safe and convenient
locations throughout the community to accom-
modate the growing demand for childcare in the
community caused by demographic, economic and
social forces. ”
111. ANALYSIS
Planning Issues
1) Is the addition of a childcare facility goal to the La
Use Element necessary and desirable?
2) Is the proposed goal consistent with other elements of
the General Plan?
Discussion
AS indicated on the attached Statistical Profile (Childcare
Resource Service) , the Carlsbad sub-regional area has 473
childcare spaces available to serve a child population of 3,502
needing care. This figures out to a ratio of one childcare spa
for every 7.4 children. The available data addresses only
children living in the area, not those brought to the City by
parents working here. Figures on employees working for school:
and state and federal agencies were not available. The County
ratio of one childcare space to four children indicates a wide
disparity with the City ratio of 1:7 which is significantly
lower. The City permits small family day care centers serving
six or fewer children to be operated by right in the R-1 zones,
however, figures on the number of children served are not
available. With the expanding growth in the area, as well as q
increasing number of commercial and industrial projects, staff
believes the need for childcare facilities will continue to
intensify.
The legal definition of a child is anyone under 18 years of agc
and there is no legal age at which a child can remain at home
unsupervised. As currently practiced in the City, if a police
responds to a call regarding unsupervised children, he must us
his own discretion as to whether or not there is a problem.
Presently, the City’s juvenile officer responds to 3-4 such ca
a month. Besides the issue of the younger child, the police
department believes activities for teenagers should also be
encouraged to promote healthy activities for this age group
rather than “teenagers hanging out at the mall”.
-2-
" I> W 0
Staff believes the proposed goal is compatible with all other
elements of the General Plan and is also in conformance with tl
Zoning Ordinance. Staff feels the proposed goal will be of
benefit to the community by recognizing a common need and
attempting to alleviate the growing shortage of childcare in tl
City.
Staff hopes that with the establishment of the childcare goal :
the Land Use Element that developers and businesses will
recognize the need for childcare facilities and be encouraged 1
provide these facilities on their own initiative. However, thc
Planning Commission may feel that more than a statement in the
General Plan is needed. They may consider possible further
actions listed below. If the Planning Commission feels any of
these actions are appropriate they can formulate them in a
recommendation to the City Council.
A) Conduct a formal needs assessment. (This would be
necessary to validate the City's position to
developers. 1
1. The needs assessment should address: population
distribution, labor force participation, any
planning or zoning obstacles, levels of state and
local funding, existing ordinances, amount and ty]
of childcare needed including the ill child, leve
of community awareness and support for childcare,
parental preferences.
B) Establish a childcare task force which could be compo
of Commission members, staff, childcare providers,
parents, non-residential developers, and other
community/governmental agencies to recommend and
implement policies and procedures to the Council.
C) Coordinate childcare programs with other governmental
agencies and childcare providers.
D) Participate in latchkey programs with Parks and
Recreation, Boy's and Girl's Club, and schools whereb
Parks and Recreation and Boy's and Girl's Club would
operate after-school programs on school grounds.
E) Establish a public awareness/publicity program and
encourage childcare resource and referral services.
F) Apply for State and Federal grants to assist in the
establishment/operation childcare facilities in the
City.
G) Adopt an ordinance requiring developers of commercial
industrial or office projects to provide childcare
facilities or pay childcare impact fees. The cities
San Francisco, Santa Monica and Col;fc$rd have implemen childcare ordinances, see Exhibit B .
-3-
If ,I 0 0
I) Offer incentives for developers to provide childcare
facilities and services such as:
1) Reduced business license fees
2) Waive business license fee for non-profit
organizations with childcare programs
3) Permit increased site coverage if space is us
4 1 Modify parking requirements for childcare are
for childcare
if it is part of a larger center or business
The Commission should be aware that it would require a
significant amount of staff time to implement some of these
options.
117. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Planning Director has determined that there will be no
significant environmental impacts resulting from this project
and has issued a Negative Declaration on June 28, 1986.
ATTACHMENTS
1 ) Planning Commission Resolution No. 2572
2) Exhibits "A", "BRt and "C", dated June 10, 1986
3 ) Environmental Document
AML:bn
6/13/86
-4-
EXHIB 0 June I(
<‘,A e
BTATf8TICAL PROFILE
ON
CHILD CCIRE CIND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES
COMPILED BY
CHILDCCIRE RESOURCE SERVICE
1033 Cudahy Place
San Diego CA 92110
Prepared for: City of Carlsbad
Area: carlsbad-La Costa, zip 92008
Date: May 1, 1986
Report prepared by: Brenda Terry-Hahn
'f cz 0 e
PREFACE
Accurate statistical information is vi 1 in today's
changing world. Cogent, successful choic A in business,
government, and public service require precise data about thg
populations served. It is therefore necessary to gather cyclical
information about such population groups, their growth anc change, and the available choices concerning them as a basis for
I
I appropriate decisions.
One area o-f such information-based decisions which is
increasingly important is the area of child care. As more anc
more women with children (who traditionally have remained a1
home) are entering the labor force, it is critical from man: 1 concerned perspectives that the populations and facilitie!
involved in this particular process be enumerated and evaluated<
It is the intention of the Childcare Resource Service t[
offer accurate, objective data and informational support so thai
useful decisions may be made in planning to meet child care ant
development needs.
1 I 1
I
I
1
I f ,J 0 e
TABLE OF CONTENTS ----- -- --------
DATA BASES FOR THIS REPORT 2
POPULATION 3
CHILD CARE 4
THE ECONOMICS OF CHILD CARE b
APPENDIX, as available 9
2
' 1 ,, 0 0
l73PLu3TIoN
The final word on all population data comes from the Census
Bureau in Washington, D. C. All other agencies dealing with
census data for the U.S.A. use this data both as a comparative
base for their own population surveys and a source of data for
informative decision-making. The Census Bureau has a reputation
among demographers for being accurate and conservative in its
figures and estimates. For its demarkation borders it uses
census tracts which are further collected into larger
geographical areas.
The population data appropriate for the purpose of this
report follows:
**
1980 DATA ---- ----
County total PoPulation__~9~l-~~-S4fj_____________ County total child population aged 0-13--g2-~65
*
SRA population
tota1---__40~~~--_------
age5 0-1-_~~~_-1-2-111?,__3-5__158_6__6-_6-9--~~~--10-13-~~~--- total child population 0-13--2803
Percent increase since 1970 149.44%
*
1986 DATA ---- ----
County total PoPulation___2_131-~~-3_23____________ County total child population aged 0-13 409 432
SRA total population 52 1_86
ages 0-1-_8_1_8__1-2-_1_4_3_5__3-5__2_0_38__6---
1 total child population 0-13 10 025
Percent increase 1980-85---25,&~--- 1985-86 2.3%
* It must be emphasized that these figures are carefully
projected porportions based on:
.................................................................
the actual papulation totals of 1980 and 1985, the actual breakouts of these specific ages in 1980,
the percentile of increase since 1980 far this area,
and a proximate comparison of the boundries of zip codes,
census tracts, and sub-regional areas.
It may NOT include all local factors which would affect
population growth and/or the need for child care which have
occurred since 1980. It is therefore a carefully prepared
estimate. ** fill population figuresof age-groupings are inclusive
throughout this report.
IThis is the county-wide percentile of increase; there is no SRA percenti:
available at this time. 4
'7 1, 0 e
I
WILD CCIRE
All child care information data comes from the statistical
data bases of Childcare Resource Service. Official listings of
licensed facilities originate from the appropriate divisions of
the county and state Departments of Social Services, Family Day Care Licensing and Community Care Licensing, and are consistently
tabulated and updated by Childcare Resource Service along with
the daily intake of child care information requests.
Childcare information for the area in question is as
f 01 1 ows:
L_IC_E_NSED CHILD CARE, De+ined Area, as of 4-1-86 :
Number of Family Day Care Homes 21 Child Spaces- 138
Number Child Care Centers - 6 Child Spaces 335 ___
# Number Exempt Facilities __ 0 Child SPaces--------- 0
47 3 --------- 27 Totals ----------
Number of requests for child care referrals, defined area, past
calendar year 404 average per month 33.6
March 1985 referrals: 39
" 1986 " : 46 an increase of 17.9%
F_Luc_IuAI_Lo_!!! LE s_up_p_L_y_ BED_ D_EEA!!m o_E c_H_LLQ!2EE_
Area gain (loss) of facilities:
=13 X last fiscal quarter 4 = 17 X child spaces 54 ___
last 12 months -------- 5 =22.7% ---- child spaces not av&L&..
................................................................ # These facilities are exempt from state licensing regulations
They are regulated by their funding source.
5
' 'L e *
SUMMARY ,O_F NEEDS ' _F_Q_R CHILD CARE in this area as ------- 4- 1-8 6 of; .................... - t
Ratio of child spaces ( 473 ) to estimated children needing
care ( 3502 ) ----------- 1:7.4 (one space for every-- 7.4 children).
Ratio of child spaces ( 473 1 to total child population 0-13
( 10 025 1 LJJ.2 (one space for every--&J-children).-
This is well beyond the county-wi& disparity of 1:4.
ESIMAIE c_H_IL_D_ p_o_p_u_IA_IIo_N, N_EE_D_LN_G_ GA_E IN, SEAL
10 025 ..................................... 1986 approximate child population 0-13
X
59% ..................................... national X children of working mothers
X
59.2% ................................................ X children (national average) placed in formal care
- -
3502 ............................................... estimate # of children 0-13 needing care in SRA
6
“4 e r)
THE ECONOMICS aF CHILD CARE
----- COSTS ,OF PROVIDING CHILD _C_A_R_E ,S_E_R_VXES
Range of charges for licensed child care in defined area
are--------------- 45 - loop ---___ weekper __------_--___- child full-timeas of 7/85
There are a number of factors which may affect the child
care rates in this community. Along with the usual economic
factors in supply and demand, the variables affecting child care
rates may include:
VARIABLES AFFECTING CHILD CARE RATES: --------- --------- ----- ---- ------ number of hours of care
number of days per week of care
special services offered: transportation, special diets,
care on days child is ill, care for children with special needs .
meals, snacks furnished
infant supplies and equipment: diapers, formula, extra
laundry, furniture, supplies
state of local economy in the immediate area
income of parent (8)
special programs offered: homework help, tutoring, extra- curricular activities and/or equipment, educational
excursions, preschool program and equipment....
average child care fees for this area
ages of children for whum care is required
credentials and experience of caregiver (11
ratio of children per adult
____ 1980 ---_-- FAMILY --------- ECONOMICS ---- DATA
Median Annual Household income this SRA S 21 772
Children below poverty level this SRA
Children of female-headed households this SRA 439 - 4.63%
908 - 9.58%
1027 20.24% ChiMJrerl of siE71e-p-t ho-eholds --------------_---I----------
Current basic AFDC grant for one parent with tw
chi 1 dren--S_58Z, -----
Current minimum wage (GROSS) monthly 9; 569.50 annually * 70’
7
@ ' '* 0
................................................................
------- SOURCES:
Childcare Resaurce Service, statistical files County of San Diego, Department of Social Services
U. S. Census Bureau, 1980 Census and 1985 Census
SANDAG
Bureau of Labor Statistics
CRS - 4/86
8
v w
I’ *>
APPEND I X --------
As available, this section will contain supportive addenda
related to the need for child care in the given community in
order far parents to participate in and support the local
economy.
9
- w
I',,
STATISTICAL PROFILE ON CHILD CARE AND DEVELOPHEW SERVICES ***
DATA BASES FOR THIS REPORT
I The data bases of information for this report vary in that
Childcare Resource Service maintains its information base b)
individual zip code areas, while the County and the Census Burear,
maintain their information bases by census tract and aggregates
of census tracts such as sub-regional areas (SRA). The borders of these areas when superimposed upon om
another do not often precisely coincide, so that the informatior given herein -- while accurate, correspondent between areas, anc
useful-- is not completely reciprocal. Described below is the
geographic area included in each base, and the general
differences between them.
M€A OF CHILD CARE INFORMTION BcI8E I
---- AREA for which information is supplied (hereinafter re+erred to
as "defined area"): _________y__________ Carlsbad - La Costa z&92008
APPROXIMATE DESCRIPTION of borders of defined
area: -2kv-=-Ss%-%P2 a ................................ frcm Oceanside and Vista on the North, southard
---------,,--,---------,L,,,,,,,,,,--- between the Pacific and San Marcos down to San Dimto ------------------- arid Leucadia
----------- -----------
...............................................................
AFEA OF WPULATION INFORMTION BASE :
------ COUNTY fi_N_D CENSUS BUREAU IDENTIFICATION INFORMATION _O_F 1I-J ------- GENERAL ----- AREA:
Sub-regional area (SRA) Carlsbad number--&U3L---
Number census tracts 7 numbers-_l_78,Q~-,~~~~~~~~~~~, 198, 200.03
GENERAL DESCRIPTION of borders of sub-regional area: Please see
----,-,,,,,,,----,,,,,,,__,,,,,,-,,,,,,,--~---------------- and Ocean Hills areas also are included in the SRA and sm dl 0th-
-%EL-?z2¶hLY-ts-E!!2 -*- ~~-_de_s_~-~n~-~-~~~-~~-~-~~e-~~-=~~ -YiJ&J~
~~~~-are-~~1~_~-_------_-------------------------------------
APPROXIMATE DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THESE C\REASt,nhQutascTll;tremiles
-o,f,rs-i&Q~A-~sLs ............................................ ............................................................... ...............................................................
NOTES
3
w w
‘I vi
YL - / --
rk -- __ _.
,I CjA .. CARLSBAD /&X? L@:-L -
43
0 CEANSi D E x-:
I I 1
I
I
0 = SAN DIEGO COUNTY - 1980 CENSUS TRACTS
I = qprox,&& zip eode boundaties,%~008
v w .. I. -. . OHANCt LO Jr
Ocearwde Ifdrbo
Buena Vista LJ~
SOURCE: San Dtego Association of Government! FIGURE 7. MAJOR INDUSTRIAL PARK AREAS
w w '3 ,,
0 to 10 minutes
all to 20 ninutes
t~ 21 to 30 minutes
TRRVEL TIMES CENTEREO ON DOWNTOGIN CRRLSBRD
9mc:w34 OF
w * e,
i i
Valley Center
Oceatmde Harbor
Lake Wohllord
Buena Vista Lago
I Escondido
1
I
Lake Jenoi
Spring Valley
Swecrwarer Reservorr
UDDer OlaY fierervotr
Lower Ora v Rerervorr
FIGURE 2: MAJOR OFFICE BUILDINGS - SAN DIEGO REGION SOURCE Sari Dwo Assoc of Gave
11,
Oceaisicle Harbor
611etii1 Vistn Lijgoof
b’a 1 I (/ 1 lit os L 390 Of
Card iff - by- the-Se
FIGURE 4: MAJOR RETAIL CENTERS - NORTH SOURCE: San Diego Assocation of Governmen
9 Escondido Square 24 Plaza Xest Lorna
A Escondido Village Val1 11 Flower Will 26 Poway Towne Ce B Plaza Carnino Real 12 Gernco - Escondido 27 Qancho Bernardc
Reoional Centers 10 Fallbrook Town Center 25 Poway Plaza
13 K-Mart - Poway 28 Rancho an Marc
15 Lomas Santa Fe Plaza 30 Safeway Shoppin
1 Broadway Vista Center 15 Lumberyard 31 San Diego Cente
2 Camino Town and County 17 Midtown Plaza 32 San Marcos Villa
3 Carlsbad Plaza South 18 Mission Center
4 College Plaza 19 Mission Square 34 The Vineyard
5 El Camino North 20 Oceanside Five Shopping Center 35 Vallecitos Town
6 Encinitas Town and County 21 Oceanside Plaza 36 Vista Center
7 Encinitas Village 22 Old Poway Village 37 Xiegand Plaza
8 Escondido Hills Plaza 23 Pacific Shores Shopping Canter
Subreoional Centers 14 La Costa Plaza 29 Royal Center
33 Santa Fe Plaza
w w
1 *I
Oceniisicle Hart)or
6lIPlld VlStR Lc?qO(Jrl
FIGURE 6: MAJOR PRIVATE EMPLOYERS - NORTH SOURCE. San Diego Assocatton of Governments
1 AC-DC Electronics
2 -4llstate Insurance Company
3 Armorlite, Inc.
4
5
6
7 Hewlett Packard Company
8
9 Rearfott Division -,Singer Co.
10
11 NCR Corporation
12 Palomar Memorial FIospital*
13 Sony Manufacturing Company
14 Tri-City Xospital*
15 Washington Patrol Service, Znc.
Rechtel Power Corporation (San Onofre) Burroughs Corporation - Ranc\o Bernard0
Deutsch Co. Electronic Components nivision
Tiughes Aircraft Co. - Industrial Products 3ivision
La Costa Hotel & Spa
*Technically a Public Agency
- W
MAJOR OFFICE BUILDINGS I I.
YF-AR SOTI ARE
NAME BUILT F0r)TAGE
1 Aero Office Park I 1980 90,000
2 Aid Building Phase I 1983 124,000
3 Balboa Business Center 1978 75,000
4 Bank of America PIaza 1982 266,397
3 12,410 5 Bank of California Plaza 1971
7 Black Mountain Commerce Park 16 Buildings) 1975 96,349 8 California First Bank Building 1966 237,000
199,050 9 Centerside I Building 1983
10 Central Savings Tower 1976 330,173
11 Central Valley Plaza 1981 8 1,946
12 Centre City Building 1928 81,273
13 Chamber Building 1963 167,928
14 Commerce Park 1978 85,600
15 Crossroads 1983 130,000 16 Crossroads Limited 1978 114,750
17 Executive Office Building 1963 216,000
18 Fifth & Broadway Building 1910 85,000 19 Fifth Avenue Financial Center 1965 120,988
20 First Interstate Plaza 1984 467,840
21 First National Bank Building 1982 527,917 22 Home Federal Building 1927 187,973 148,870 23 HomeTower 1963
24 ICW Office Park I3 Buildings) 1980 86,500
25 Imperial Bank Tower 1982 529,675
.26 Kearny EI 1974 98,000
27 Yearny Office Park 1975 89.964 28 La Jolla Bank and Trust 1984 150,439
29 La Jolla Gateway I 1982 169,000
30 La Jolla Professional Center 1980 146,118
31 La Jolla Science Center 1981 80,000 32 Lion Plaza 1972 93,555 . 33 Lion United Artists 198 1 76,290
34 Mission Office Park I964 165,498
35 Mission Valley Financial Center 1972 152,200
36 Mission Valley South 1968 85,000
37 Montgomery Airport Plaza 1982 89,630 198,000 38 Montgomery Business Center 1983 39 North Coast Business Park (9 Buildings) 1982 186,000
---
6 Bernardo Center (9 Buildings) , 1984 81,220
40 Pacific Professional Center 1983 81,000
41 Pines, The 1980 80,000
42 Prado Plaza 1984 90,534 43 Professional Office Center 1984 94,643
44 Rio Vista Office Building 1984 107,000
45 Regents Square 1984 162,000 46 San Diego Federal Building 1974 323,000
47 San Diego Tech Center 1983 160,000
48 San Diego Trust & Savings Building 1928 . 124,293 49 Security Pacific Plaza 1973 233,191
50 Seville Plaza 1981 132,000
51 Sorrento Valley Science Park 1984 94,011 52 Sports Arena Village Office Plaza (6 Buildings) 1981 185,OQO
54 Sunroad Plaza 1982 127,000
56 Torrey Pines Susiness k Research Park 1977 18 1,284
57 Tycor Title Insurance Building 1958 76,000
58 Union Bank Building 1969 375,000
60 West Bernardo Plaza Phase I 1984 79,746
61 West Bernardo Plaza Phas? II 1984 83,638
53 Spreckels Building 1912 9 1,000
55 Sycamore Creek Office Park (3 Buildings) 1983 91,000
59 Wells Fargo Bank Building 1982 3 8 5,648
COMPLETION EXPECTED DURING 1985
A Capital Pacific Business Plaza 1985 171,000
B Fargo La Jolla 1985 79,000
C CatewayII 1985 166,000
D Highland Park Business Center 1985 95,000
~ F Plaza At La Jolla 1985 168,000
C Regents Park Financial 1985 97,000
H Ruffin Office Park 1985 107,000
11 1,000 I San Diego National Bank Building 1985
J Scripps Plaza 1985 140,000
K Seaview Corporate Center 1985 200,000
L Sorrento View 1985 84,000
M Sunroad Plaza Phase 11 1985 200,000
N Torrey Pines Science & Business Center 1985 160,000
0 Torrey Pines Science Park Building X7 1985 92,000
P Treena Street Building C 1985 157,218
E Metropolitan Life Building 1985 200,000
Q University Center Lot X7 1985 120,000
R Unknown Name 1985 128,000
S Wa teridge 1985 2a0,ooo
7 w
, ,>
MAJOR INDUSTRIAL AREAS
Total # # of Total S
of Parks Parks in Area of All €
City - Area in Area >100,000 Sq.ft. in Ar.
1 Carlsbad Airport 28 4 2,114,j
2 Carlsbad Ave Encinas 5 0 225,1
3 Vista South 4 1 262,d
4 Oceanside Airport 4 2 628,:
5 Oceanside Oceanside Blvd. 7 1 411,1
6 SanMarcos Rt. 78 42 5 1,968,4
7 san Marcos Rancho Santa Fe Rd. 2 1 279,5
8 Escondido West 26 0 817,E
9 SanDiego Sorrento Valley/ 62 7 3,813,:
10 SanDiego Mir am ar 77 24 6,455,t
11 SanDiego Rose Canyon 10 2 670,:
12 SanDiego Kearny Mesa 71 . 21 5,5 17 ,3
13 SanDiego Scripps Ranch 15 3 2,179,9
14 SanDiego Rancho Bernard0 21 2 1,03 5,4
Torrey Pines
15 San Diego Mission Gorge 11 2 73399
16 San Diego Sports Arena/Bay Pk. 11 0 315,4
17 SanDiego San Ysidro 7 0 259,4
18 National City West of Broadway 10 4 1,249,s
19 Chula Vista Southwest 23 7 1,584,9
20 El Cajon/Santee Gillespie Field - 48 - 5 2,324,9
Totals 484 91 3 2,849,4
*There exists approximately 2 million additional square feet of industrial park space scatt
throughout the region not within these major industrial areas.
@
SOURCE. San Oiego Assoclarion of Governments Jan. 1985
a m
CHILDCARE RESOURCE SERVICE 1033 Cudahy Place San Diego,
San Diego 275-4800 Escondido 743-7919 Encinitas 753-3755
CHILD CARE IN SAN DIEGO COUNTY
FACT SHEET
POPULATION : The population of San Diego County (over 2 million and increasir dramatically reflects the growing need for child care in this
community. A general heavy population growth of 2.4% (45,000
persons) per year is anticipated.
WORKING FAMILIES
Need for Child Care: Childcare Resource Service receives 90 - 150 calls per day for child care referrals (a total of 4,036 calls for the October-Dei
1985 quarter). Approximately 80% of the calls were from workinl families who required child care in order to continue employmen- Another 10% of these calls represent parents who are in trainini which leads to gainful employment.
The median household income of San Diego County (1980) is $17,1( with a low of $10,516 in central county. The average cost of fi time child care in 1985 ranges from $50 - $85 per week, per chi Therefore, the average working family bears an enormous burden . meet child care costs.
High Costs of Child Care:
SINGLE PARENT FAMILIES
Need for Financial Assistance: In 1980, 24.2% of San Diego households were headed by a single 1 (an 18% increase over the 1970 census). The average weekly sal of fGle heads of households maintaining families was $243 per week.
maintaining families was $365 per week. Other statistics revea
that females as single parent head of households with children
under six (6) received a median annual income of $5,696, while
male heads of comparable households received $10,712 per year.
Again, with child care costs of $50 - $85 per child, per week, parent households are in crisis.
Solutions: To meet this critical need, Childcare Resource Service maintain a state funded Alternative Payment Program. This program serve
300 children (170 families). Approximately 95% of these famili are single par= households. 900 - 1000 children (500+ families) who are eligible for subsid
child care but there is inadequate funding to meet their needs. More funds are needed for this program to meet the needs of San Diego County. - All subsidized programs in San Diego County have
The average salary of male (single) heads of household
The program maintains a list of
ZIP CODE CURREPIT i OF OPE?IINGS = OF ACTIVE d OF CE?ITEgS I FAM I L Y DAY CARE ilOl"lE5 1 il'iF2iTS
26
I 34
Oceansi de
92054
Oceansi de 92056
Vista 47 92083
Carlsbad 20 92008
1 PRESCHOOL I SC:IOOL-;\GE
7 15 20 12
2 only far 23 14 5 family in stress or emergency
17 35 58 36
9 24 17 6
e a
EXHIBIT "R"
JUNE 10, 1986
santa Monica - required childcare in new
industrial offices over 40,000
square feet.
San Francisco - required to pay $1 per square foc
to affordable childcare fund or
provide childcare center if
proposing 50,000 square feet or
more.
Concord - developers of industrial/
commercial/office space costing
over $40,000 to pay a childcare
impact fee of 0.5% of developmenl
costs or provide a childcare
center meeting the needs of the
employees. Can be waived if stuc
shows no need.
VARD BUSINESS REV W E:
MARCH/APRIL 1986 6-
Northside Child Deveh
in Minneapolis, Control
tion studied 90 employe
month period. Thirty mc children in Northside w
with a sample of 30 mot
other child care arrangei.
other employees with nc
grown children. The avei
absenteeism rate for day
the company-sponsored 1
4.4%, compared with 6.0
participants in the two CI
The average monthly tur:
among program users wa:
pared with 6.3% for nonp
In three nation
employers with child C;~I~
ments, the majority of res
ported that the programs
effects on a variety of pro(
measures (see the Exhibit
those executives who ans
human resource manager
though they offered their
c as impressions rather tha
results, the reasonablenes:
vey results rings true.
Rather than doc
sity seminar for executives, partici- what companies save by re
pants were asked to estimate the per- child care concerns, a Port
centage of their workers who are in study shows what compar
families in which the male breadwin- not responding. ,4 suFJey o
ner is the sole support of his at-horne 8,000 employees from 22 c
wife and children. The answers ranged the city found that 5Y:6 of
from 40% to 70%. But only 10% of U.S. ers with children under 12
households iit that traditional mode. ty findmg child care. Worn,
About 40% oi the work force dren under 11 missed abou
is now made up of families with both work each year. Employed.
spouses workmg, with another 6% be- hadawifeorother adultat1
ing single parents. Estimates state that 8 days of work per year-a r
by 1990,65% of people entering the la- lar to that of men with no c
bor market will be women (new en- The authors explain that “I
trants or reentrants). Approximately teeism rates are lower than
80% of working women are of child- because they carry fewer ck
bearing age. Ninety percent of them responsibilities. Women mz
will become pregnant. About 60% of low rates possible.” Mother
married men who work have wives off to look for care, or tend t
workmg full or part time. The needs of child, or respond to a last-m
both mothers and fathers are already gency. Absenteeism was noi
playing an expanded role in recruiting a “woman’s problem“ but a
programs, benefit plans, and productiv- and turnover. so1ution.l
ity incentives. Child care help can also re- Many businesses, Then there are the children. a good 44,000 in the mediun
People usually think about the young- size category-have taken li.
est ones, but about a third of all Amen- action regarding employees’
needs. Some executives see : Ms. Friedman is a nationally onomic justification for gett known expert on child care issues and volved, either as providers of a senior research associate at the Work arrangements with indepenc
and Family Information Center of the cies, or through other assista
Conference Board. as modified work schedules.
. co He
L
Dana E. Friedman
@ - Special Report
“lncreasingly child cure ’ Chld care for
kids
employees’ is a competitive issue: will it help attract
and hold wo&ers,
reduce tmove~ absenteeism, error,
and accidents!”
.. A
At a recent Harvard Univer- can children between 6 and 13 are home
alone for some time after school. A new
term has entered our vocabulary: the
“three o’clock syndrome.” It refers to
reduced productivity arid higher error
and accident rates as employees’ minds
turn to their children around the time
when school lets out.
Why companies get
involved
RoughIy 2,500 U.S. compa-
nies help with their employees’ child
care needs. That’s about a fourfold in-
crease in four years. These companies
believe that getting involved in child
care heIps increase recruiting, morale,
productivity, and quality, and decrease
accident rates, absenteeism, tardiness,
duce the stress workers feel. A 1985
study of 650kmployees in a large, Bos-
ton-based corporation reported that
the stress of balancing work and family responsibilities is the heaviest contrib-
utor to depression among employees,
regardless of gender.’
tium of businesses to establish the
After spearheading a consor-
e' _. ' Hqrvari Business Review 0 March-April 1986
skeptical; productivity and other gains Businesses through(
, are difficult to prove. They are con- country have collaborated wit
cerned about potential problems: costs, dreds of school districts and cc ' complex insurance arrangements, obli- nity agencies to use school pre ! gations incurred by referrals, parental run before- and after-school pr j complaints, quality control, and equity The Houston Committee on F I issues. or profit-making agencies to run their . Sector Initiatives coordinates ; . Actually, many such con- programs. Kinder-Care, the largest from 30 companies to enable I
j. cems or fears are unfounded. Costs for agencies to offer after-school s
getting involved vary widely. Some are in schools, churches, and storc
remarkably low. Many companies Several companies contribute
merely subsidize existing child care "warm lines"-a telephone ho
programs and organizations. Others of- children to use when they get 1
fer space, expertise like training for from school.
caregivers, and other resources such as 'Some companies - F
furmture. Some offer referral services hc. in Illinois, Wang, and 31M, j
to point parents in the right directions. example-have created summc
All child care costs (direct or allocated) camps on nearby company or c
nity property. This has proven
pensed. Several states offer special tax larly helpful to dworced paren
credits for employers who provide cer- have custody of children only (
the summer and, therefore, ha.
regular child care setup.
To deal with absentt
Coming Glass Works and
Merck Pharmaceuticals provided the
start-up funds for private, nonprofit
centers, which rely on user fees to cov-
er operating expenses. Other businesses
prefer to contract with either nonprofit
profit-making chain of day care centers
in this country runs several programs,
including those at Cigna Corporation,
Campbell Soup Company, and Disney
World. Financial arrangements differ
among the companies that use Kinder-
Care.
Most companies that inves-
tigate the on-site option decide that it
is not appxopriate or affordable, ihough.
It is not suitable for some due to the
cost of downtown space, or employee
commuting patterns, or the limited
number of workers that would eventu-
ally be served.
L are in some way tax deductible or ex-
' tab kinds of help.
Small companies or those
L d located near each other (as in an indus- sociated with sick children, He
Packard and Levi Strauss joint1
lished a 15-bed infirmary attacl
day care center in San Jose, CaI
Other companies contract wit1
growing number of services th:
vide trained nurses for all-day c
the child's home. The 3M Con]
pays 70% of the $6.25-per-hou
for in-home nursing services oi
Children's Hospital in St. Paul.
Business can contrit
existing child care services. Sol
panies give day care directors a
trative help; some assist with c!
write staff training. Other busiI
use their political clout to lobb
increased government support
care. New York State employer:
EM, Con Edison, Morgan Guar
and American Express have rep
tatives on Governor Mario Cuc
Commission on Child Care.
: trial park) can collaborate to create,
support, or run a center on a joint basis.
Seven Wand radio stations in the
Washington, D.C. area created the
Broadcasters' Child Development Cen-
ter in a conveniently located school.
The Burbank. California Unified
School District solicited SIOIOOO in
contributions from eight employers,
among them Lockheed, NBC, Colum-
bia Pictures, and Universal Studios, to
renovate an empty school building for
child care. In return, each employer re-
ceived 20 slots for its children.
Companies can also help or-
ganize so-called family day care provid-
ers, that is, neighborhood people who
care for up to six children in their
homes. Many parents prefer this home-
like setting for vev young children.
This option is particularly flexible. The
f3cility can be located near home or
work, hours can be extended according
to work shifts, it can serve a wide range
of ages, and the number of providers
can expand or contract as needs change.
Several companies hire local
agencies to recruit, train, and license
family day care providers along their
employees' commuting paths. St. Luke's
Rush-Presbyterian Medical Center in
Chicago, which has a 225-infant wait-
ing list for its own on-site center, estab-
Iished a satellite system of family day
care homes for which the hospital's
center provides training and backup
support (as when a caregiver gets sick).
. Who's doing what?
Companies that help with
child care get involved in roughly four
ways: providing services where the
community supply is lacking; offering
idormation about parenting or on how
to select quality care; giving financial
assistance for purcnasing community
services; and freeing up time to help
employees balance the responsibilities
of iamily and work.
Providing services
Some companies decide that
an on-site child caxe center is the best
option for them. They either run them
themselves or rent space to a profes-
sional organization. Stride Rite Corpo-
ration began its first on-site program in
1971. Parents can have lunch with their
children, breast-feed, administer medi-
cine when necessary, and meet easily
with teachers. Employees pay for the
program according to a salary-based,
slidingfee scale, with the maximum
fee $65 a week. The success of the first
program led to a second Stride Rite
center in January 1982. Wang Laborato-
ries in Massachusetts and Hoffmann-
La Roche in New Jersey also have on-
site centers. These companies believe
that by hiring center staff as company
employees and making them eligible
for company benefits they attract
better and more committed caregivers.
Offering information
The child care svster
ten fragmented, poorly advertis
varied in quality. A poor child c.
choice may translate into addit.
days off from work when pareni
look for new arrangements.
More than 500 comp.
have contracted with local info
and referral agencies that maim
computerized lists of available
care services. Run by the Unitel
or as private, nonprofit agencies
can be found in the yellow page
-
i Harvard Business Review 0 March-April 1986 30 Y a
Exhibit Results of three national .. surveys of employers that provide child care services
Perry, 1978* Magid, 1983t Burud, et at., 191
Survy "What, if any, of the following changes Survey "Which of the following items do you "Would you say that question are changes that have occurred as a question perceive as having been aftected by :::.on service has had an the following aspec operation?" Respo given a list of 16 itei asked to rate the ef care program on ea negative. unknown,
result of havin a day care center for employees?" %cespondents were given a list of 7 items and were asked to indicate which had been affected by the child care service.
the child care program?" Respon- dents were given a list of 16 items and were asked to rank the top 5 items that were most significantly affected by the child care service. Each item was then weighted according to the number and order of the rankings and a cumulative rank assigned. (Only positive items were listed. like "recruitment advantage," "less turn- * over," "lower absenteeism." etc.)
Survey 58 empioyers responded. most of Survey 204 companies responded. Survey Out of 415 surveys. sample 178 businesses an5 question. The majoi sample which were hospitals with on-site sample
dents were empioyc their own day care (
child care centers.
Aspects Percentage Aspects Cumulative Aspects affected of employers affected rankings by affected responding respondents affirmatively
Increased ability to 88 % Recruitment 440 Employee morale attract employees advantage
absenteeism employee morale Public relations
Improved 65 Lower absentee 214 Employee work employee attitude rates satisfaction toward soonsoring organization Less turnover 21 1 Public@
Favorable publicity 60 Attract persons on 208 Abiiity to attract because of center leave back to work new or returning
Lower job turnover 57 Attract available 205 rate talented Ernoloyee
Improved 55 employee attitude improve emoioyee 170 Turnover toward work work satisfacrion Employee Improved 36 Better public 154 motivation community relations Aosenteeism relations Better community 137 image Scheduling flexibility
Productivity Improve employee 67 Oua!ity of work motivation force Improve produc- 40 Equal employment tion efficiency opportunity
Availability of 26 temporary help Quality of products
Tax advantage 14
Provide equal 13 opportunity employment
Improved quality 11 of product produced
Recruitment .. -Lower 72 Improved 345 L
workers
employees commitment '
Less tardiness 88 .
or service
Tardiness
*Kathryn Senn Perry. Employers and Child Care: Establishing SeNlces Through the Workplace fwashinglon. D.C.: Women's Bureau. US. Depanment ot Labor. 1982).
*Renee Y. Magid. Child Care Initiative5 br Working Pareors: Why Employers Get Involved (New York: American Manage men1 Assouation. 1983).
ttSandra Eurud. Pamela and Jacquel n McCros Supponed &Id Care: Human Resources (Bo House. 1984).
/Continued on page 321 -
Harvard Business Review
programs usually limit eligibility to
certain income groups or ages of chil-
dren. Polaroid Corporation covers a
portion of the child care costs for em-
ployees whose yearly family incomes
are under $25,000. The Measurex Cor-
. poration pays $100 per month for child
care costs during an infant’s first year.
Baxter Travenol Laboratories (in Illi-
nois) and Palmetto (FloridaJ Hospital
confine vouchers to a selected group of
day care centers. Zayre Corporation
reimburses employees $20 a week
for any child care they choose for their
children five years old and under.
A recent Conference Board
survey found that fewer than 25 U.S.
companies offer this direct form of fi-
nancial assistance, which comes to
about $750 to $1,000 per year per recip-
ient employee.3 Flexible benefit pro-
grams, which let employees choose
among an array of benefits, are usually
cheaper for employers than vouchers.
About 2,000 employers now provide
flexible benefits, and approximately
50% to 75% of their plans offer depen-
dent care as an option. Dependent
care-includmg care for children, elder-
ly parents, and handicapped dependents
-is a nontaxable benefit. It is one of
many options in a cafeteria of choices
offered by Educational Testing Service,
American Can, Procter & Gamble,
Steelcase, and Comerica.
Another type of flexible plan
is the freestanding flexible spending ac-
count, which maintains a basic benefit
package, then creates a spending ac-
count for a variety of taxable and non-
taxable benefits. The account may
include an employer contribution, aug-
mented by a portion of profit’sharing,
but it is usually funded through salary
reduction-which enables employees to use pretax dollars to purchase child
care. The salary reduction option actu-
ally lowers employers’ costs by elimi-
nating social security and unemploy-
ment expenses for the amount of sala-
ries reduced.
Chemical Bank contributes
$300 per employee to a spending ac-
count that includes child care assis-
tance that can be augmented with 50%
of profit sharing and up to $5,000 in
salary reduction. In 1984, child care ac-
counted for nearly 2% of all the bank’s
employee benefit choices and 8.7% of
reimbursement dollars available from
its benefit programs. This totaled
$518,053 for child care assistance. Mel-
‘March-April 1986 e 32
proviie on-site counseling, parenting
seminars, and publicity materials to
promote the child care services to em-
ployees.
contractor called Work/Family Direc-
tions to identify local resource and re-
ferral programs for employees in its
200 plant sites. Through this program,
the company funds local agencies to
provide referrals and follow-up services
for all IBM parents seeking child care.
The corporation also allocates money
to stimulate the supply of chdd care
services so more parents can eventu-
ally be accommodated.
house referral programs. Steelcase hc.’s
child care services include employee
access to two child care specialists who
conduct parenting workshops and help
workers find appropriate community
resources.
Child care problems often
call for partnership between the public
and private arenas. Local governments
can facilitate employer involvement by
creatinga child care delivery system
that businesses can, in turn, augment.
The pattern of employer support for
child care suggests that companies are
less interested in starting up new pro-
gams than they are in helping their
employees find or pay for existing ser-
vices. BankAmerica Foundation an-
nounced a plan in March 1985 to ex-
pand the supply and improve the
quaiity of child care throughout the
state of California. The foundation
were it not for the statewide system of
resource and referral agencies the Cali-
fornia legislature had already created.
lon Bank, Warvard Universi
PepsiCo have also establish
ing accounts that include d
care as an option.
IBM has created a national
Freeing up time
Flextime, part-til
and job sharing are arrange:
U.S. companies are introdu
duce workers’ child care pr
proximately one-third of th
“1300” companies offer the
ees personal leave or sick cl
leave when family member
A Columbia Unii
study reports that every We
dustrial nation except the 1.
States mandates some form
nity leave.s In the U.S., the :
nancy Discrimination Act I
companies to treat pregnanl
other disability. Consequen
employees return to work a
lowed six to eight weeks of
Among higher income won
of three return within four I
cording to a 1983 study.6 On
female workers, however, hi
ity coverage and receive pay
maternity leave. Some coml
experimenting with matern
temity leaves to facilitate tf
to return to work after birth
tion. Another survey indica1
women do not necessarily M
time off; some preferfo retl:
on a part-time basis for a wl
Businesses also set up in-
might not have set this ambitious goal . c,
How you can gel
Selecting the righ~
depends on a unique blend o
ment objectives, employees’
community resources. To be
important to give at least on
the company the responsibil
ploring work-family issues a
range of solutions available.
nies often organize a task foi
research and decision makir.
zations like the Work and Fa
mation Center of the Confer
can provide national data ani
to companies that already ha
grams. State child care licen:
cies, the United Way, and loc
agencies also have helpful in
Internal sources li
ployee assistance programs, I
Easing financial burdens
It can cost a family from
$1,500 to $15,000 a year for child care
[with most spending about $3,000 a
year]. Some employers help by arrang-
ing for dscounts at local child care pro-
grams, much as some already do for car
rentals and sporting events. An esti-
mated 300 employers contract with
profit-making centers that use dis-
counts themselves as a marketing tool
and a way to fill unused spaces. Most of
these programs offer a 10% discount;
in about half the contracts, the employ-
er contributes 10% of the fee as well.
vouchers as a direct form of subsidy to
employees. Companies with voucher
Other employers provide
..
I -
34 e e.
>.
records, exit interviews, and health in-
surance claims can uncover informa-
ployees’ needs. Group meetings of
surveys may be problematical. . .
10% to 15% of surveyed parents who
indicate a wish for an on-site child care
children when such a center first opens
- tion about the scope and nature of em- References
employees and surveys can help, but 1 Ramsav Coopn and Dianne Burden, srudv in propess by
the BostonUniveniry School of Social Work. Experience shows that only
2 Arthur C. Ernleu and Paul E. Koreq Hard to Find and Difficult to Manage: The Effects of Chld Caze on the Workplace [Portland Stare University, 19841,p.6: and Arthur C. Emlen, lames Kushmuk, Paul E. Koren. and Leslie Faught, Communitv Snares: Corporate Finanung of a Child Care Iniormauon Service
Depanment of Health and Human Services. 1985), p. 10.
3 See my report, Corporate Financial Assistance ior Child Care (New York Conference Board, 1985).
corporate involvement in child care . Dmcuons for the Future
center, for example, actually enroll
up. Only after it has established a good
reputation will very many employees
start to use it.
Of course, companies need
to assess what already exists in the
costs and the quality of local services,
and they may identify community peo-
community and learn about prevailing , IWashmgron. D.C.:
ple to collaborate with later. All this is
part of the job of getting started.
4 Corporauons and Two-Career Families: Arguments for and against
(New York: Catalyst, 1981 I, p. 45. exist. Increasingly, however, it is a com-
petitive issue: Will child caTe help at-
tract and hold workers, reduce turnover, 5 Yale Bush Center
L on Child Development and Social Policy Advisory Committee onlnfanr Care Leave,
INew Haven, Conn.: Iiovember 26,1985!, p. 2.
.. ..
absenteeism, error, and accidents?
Employer-supported child Statement and Recommendations care is likely to grow at a slow but
steady pace. The movement is tem-
pexed by business executives who tend
more involved in the personal lives of
6 SheilaB. Kameman. Alfred 1. Kahn, and Paul Kmgston. .hiotern:rS Pobcies and Woriun:: Women
iNew \iurk: Columbia Universirv Press. 19831, p. 66.
to proceed with caution when getting
their staffs. For ths reason, companies
may begin with smali steps toward un-
derstanding work and family issues
and responding to employees’ child
7 The Corporare Guide to ?or5nta! icave
‘New Wrk. Caialvst, IO br puhiisncd
in spring 1986!. care needs. But the Employee Benefit
Research Institute predicts that child
care will be the fnnge benefit of the
1990s. That is likely to happen because,
being sound for employees, it becomes
good for business.
.. -
, a Q
DEVELOPMENTAL 1200 ELM, SERVICES CARLSBAD, CI
(619) 43 LAND USE PLANNINQ OFFICE
Citp of 4Carlsbab
NEGATIVE DECLARATION
PROJECT ADDRESS/LOCATION: City of Carlsbad.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use
Element to include the encouragement of childcare in the community as
a goal of the General Plan.
The City of Carlsbad has conducted an environmental review of the
above described project pursuant to the Guidelines for Implementation
of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental
Protection Ordinance of the City of Carlsbad. As a result of said
review, a Negative Declaration (declaration that the project will not
have a significant impact on the environment) is hereby issued for the
subject project. Justification for this action is on file in the
Planning Department.
A copy of the Negative Declaration with supportive documents is on
file in the Planning Department, City Hall, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad,
CA., 92008. Comments from the public are invited. Please submit
comments in writing to the Planning Department within ten (10) days of
date of issuance.
DATED: June28, 1986
CASE NO: GPA/LU 86-4 Planning Director
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH DATE: June 28, 1986
ND4
11/85
\
Chairman Schlehuber declared the public hearing opened at
6:11 pa. and issued the invitation to speak.
Julie Nygaard, 3405 Spanish Way, representing Carlsbad
School District, addressed the Commissionand informed that she would not be able to attend the August 13th meeting.
She spoke in favor of this General Plan Amendment.
Ms. Nygaard informed that the Boys and Girls Club worked
with Carlsbad School District to establish a program
called Scampers which services 60 children at four different school sites. However, this is not meeting all
the needs of Carlsbad.
waiting to get into this program, but there is no more
space. The cost is also excessive and continues to grow.
The State is considering licensing the program and if this
is done, then the cost will double which may eliminate the
program completely.
Ms. Nygaard further stated that at Valley Junior High
approximately 40 percent of the students are beinq
serviced by an after school program.
predicted that approximately 60 percent of the students will be serviced by that program.
bill passed by the Governor states in essense that anyone
who works in Carlsbad will now be .able to bring their
children to Carlsbad schools. What this means is that
there will not be anything for those children to do and
probably no where to go after school.
She submitted a letter from San Marcos School District
endorsing the approval of this General Plan Amendment.
There being no other person in the audience desiring to address the Commission on this matter, Chairman Schlehuber
declared the public hearing continued to August 13, 1986.
There are a number of people
In two years, it is
She added that a recent
1) GPAJLU 86-8JZC-347JLCPA 86-1 - CITY OF CARLSBAD -
General Plan Amendments, Zone Changes and Local
Coastal Plan Amendments to bring the General Plan,
Zoninq and Local Coastal Plan maps into conformance.
Mike Howes, Senior Planner, stated the purpose of this report and recommendations is to bring the land use
desiqnations on the General Plan, Zoning Map and Local
Coastal Plan into conformancy.
Mr. Howes gave the staff presentation on the first section
of the report dealing with the General Plan and Zoning
inconsistencies outside of the Coastal Zone.
I
CALL TO ORDER:
The Regular Meetinq was called to order by Chairman
Schlehuber at 6:OI p.m.
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE was led by Chairman Schlehuber.
ROLL CALL:
Present - Chairman Schlehuber, Commissioners
McFadden, Hall, Marcus, McBane, Holmes and
Schramn.
Absent - None.
Staff Members Present:
Charles Grimm, Assistant Planning Director
Dave Hauser, Assistant City Engineer Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney
Mike Howes, Senior Planner
Bob Johnson, Traffic Engineer
Adrienne Landers, Assistant Planner
Gary Wayne, Senior Planner
PLANNING COMMISSION PROCEDURES
Chairman Schlehuber reviewed the Planning Comnission
prwcedures followed in public hearings for the benefit of
the audience.
AGENDA ADDITIONS, DELETIONS OR ITEMS TO BE CONTINUED
A request was made from staff to continue Item No. 6 to
the next reaular meeting (August 27, 1986).
Chairman Schlehiiber inquired whether there was anyone in
the audience desiring to speak on this item.
in the audience indicated that he could return to the
next regular meeting if the Comnission continues this
item.
A gentleman
The Planning Commission continued Item No. 6 - GPA/LU 86-71
ZCA-197 - CITY OF CARLSMD - Amendments to the General
Plan and Zoninq Ordinance to create a land use desiqna-
tion and zone for the AT&SF Railroad Right-of-way and
the 1-5 Freeway.
CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARINGS:
A General Plan
lement to include
the encouragement of childcare in the community as a
goal of the General Plan.
meeting of July 30, 1986)
(Continued from the
Mike Howes, Senior Planner, gave a brief review of the
above item and introduced Adrienne Landers who will be
giving the presentation on this item.
COMMISSIONERS % g3
Schlehuber X
McFadden xx
Hall X
Marcus X
McBane X
Holmes X
Schramn X
0 MINUTES 0 \j SAP "0 +p/ A
Ms. Landers, Assistant Planner, gave the background and
analysis on the proposed General Plan Amendment as
contained in the staff report. The proposed goal, in
conformance with all other elements of the General Plan,
as well as the Zoning Ordinance, will benefit the
community by recognizing the common need for child care
and attempting to reduce the growing shortage of child
care in Carlsbad.
Chairman Schlehuber inquired on the background of the
statistical profile contained in the staff report. Ms.
Landers pointed out that the report was compiled by the
Childcare Resource Service which is affiliated with YMCA
and funded by the State. They received their data from
information gathered from SANDAG and the Census Ehreau.
She further responded that the data dealt with licensed
child care providers only.
Chairman Schlehuber declared the public hearing opened at 6:lO p.m. and issued the invitation to speak.
Dan Sherlock, 3741 Monroe Street, Director of the Carlsbad
Boys and Girls Club, addressed the Commission in support
of the proposed amendment and enlightened the Commission
further on the child care situation in Carlsbad. He gave
the definition of a l'latchkeyl' child. He pointed out that
there are seven exempt facilities in town with 337 spaces.
Of those spaces, about 10% are vacant at all times.
gave brief statistical information regarding the Scampers
program.
Margie Cool, 2510 Unicornio Street, addressed the
Commission and read a statement into the record opposing
the General Plan amendment because she feels that the
goal is not consistent with the existing goals of the
Land Use Element. (The statement is on file with the
Clerk. 1
Hap L'Heureux, President of the Carlsbad Chamber of
Commerce, addressed the Comnission in opposition to the ,
General Plan amendment. He stated that he concurred with
the statements made by Ms. Cool, and pointed out that
this is a social service issue and not a land use issue. He stated that although many of the people in the
business community endorse the language and the concept
of child care, there are a lot of questions in their
minds on what the inclusion of this goal will entail. He
suggested that the Commission recomnend a human service
element to the General Plan be created that addresses not
just the day care issue but other social items as well.
Mae 3ohnson, 7227 Mimosa, representing the League of
Women Voters, North Coast, San Diego County, addressed
the Commission in support of the General Plan amendment
and read a statement into the record listing the various
aspects of Child Care supported by the League of Women
Voters of San Diego County. (The statement is on file with the Clerk. )
Doris Lipska, representing Childcare Resource Service, 1843 Campesino Place, Oceanside, addressed the Commission
and informed that they are the service which prepared the
statistical profile included in the staff report. She
gave a brief history regarding their agency and stressed
that child care needs to be seen as an essential service
in any community.
He
0 , 0 MINUTES
Page 3 \\B 5 % TJ% 1 August 13, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION
Ms. Lipska pointed out the various obstacles that day
care centers face and subsequently are discouraged from
proceeding. She emphasized that this goal is a land use
issue as child care facilities reouire space -- space
which is not available because of the excessive land
costs.
Resource Service would be glad to provide the Commission
with the resources and information available to them on
this issue.
Ms. Lipska responded to various questions posed by
Chairman Schlehuber regarding the statistical profile and
informed that they have available and will provide the
Commission a national study done by Sandra &rud wherein
various companies were surveyed wherein it was noted in some cases that reduced absenteeism resulted from the
provision of child care by the employer.
McFadden noted that the Dana E. Friedman report included in the staff report also addresses that particular issue.
Peggy Blush, Director of Pilgrim Children's Center,
Pilgrim Congregational Church, addressed the Commission in favor of the amendment. She stressed that there is a
demand for child care services in Carlsbad, and expressed her concern that because of the lack of licensed day care
centers, many of the children end up in homes that are not licensed. She concurred with Ms. Lipska that there is no
space available for child care centers because of the high
costs involved, and pointed to Children's World as an
example - they have been actively looking for property for
three years now.
In response to Commissioner Marcus, Ms. Blush informed
that their center is licensed for 80 children, and there
are 25 children on a waiting list presently.
Camille Mitkevich, 4640 Trieste Drive, Carlsbad,
representing the Soroptomist International and the Family
Services of San Diego County (Oceanside/Carlsbad Off ice),
addressed the Commission in favor of the amendment and pointed out that the child care issue is a land use,
economic and social issue. She pointed out a parent's
work performance is closely tied to the quality of child
care available in the City and stressed the need for
facilities geared to include children in every age
category and in close proximity and meeting the health
needs of sick children.
Ms. Mitkevich concluded by stating that the Family
Services has a program ready for use to counsel couples
and single parents to identify the child care specific
needs and the child care resources.
There beinq no other person in the audience desiring to
address the Commission on this matter, Chairman
Schlehuber declared the public hearing closed at 6:35
p.m.
Commissioner McFadden inouired why the Commission could
not consider the recommendations contained in the staff
report beyond deciding whether to approve the General Plan
amendment or not. Chairman Schlehuber further inquired on the reasons why staff was proposing that this goal be
included in the Land Use Element of the General Plan.
She concluded by stating that the Childcare
Commissioner
Ms. Landers explained that staff feels it is important to
establish this as a Citywide goal in the General Plan.
Staff does not know specifically what the needs
are, and could not make any specific recommendations other
than to include the goal in the General Plan. However,
staff does hope that the Planning Commission will make a
recommendation to the City Council to establish a task-
force who can make specific recomnendations following a
needs assessment.
Dan Hentschke, Assistant City Attorney, added that by
including the child care goal in the Land Use Element of
the General Plan, the Commission is establishing a policy for the physical development of the child care facilities.
There is no question as to the legality of placing this
policy in the Land Use Element and is entirely
appropriate.
Commissioner McFadden recommended that the Commission
consider all the recomnendations contained in the staff
Page August 13, 1986 PLANNING COMMISSION
report. She pointed wt a correction to Recommendation trB't. The last sentence reads "...to recommend and
implement policies...to the Council". She stated it
should be reworded to read "...to recomnend the
implementinq policies...to the Council".
and staff concurred with this correction.
Commissioner McFadden commented that she saw the City's
role as the facilitator and coordinator to get all of the fraqmented child care units functioning to offer alternate
options for the City's residents.
Commissioner McFadden suggested that another
recommendation be added to the list of recomnendations as
follows: "3. Establish childcare benefit options for
municipal employees such as, flex hours, job sharing,
vendor voucher, custodial child care and the like in the
employees benefits package."
child care consortium with other businesses to institute
an accessible child care facility.
Commissioner Holmes added that the City should not
overlook a means of startinq child care financially by
attaching a condition to a business license -- businesses
should have their fair financial share in the provision of
child care.
In the discussion that ensued wherein various
Commissioners expressed their support of the amendment,
Chairman Schlehuber stated that although he definitely
supports the amendment, he could not support
Recommendations "Elq1 - "3" until Recommendation lvA't - a
formal needs assessment - is completed.
The Commission
The suggestion is to join a
OMM MISSIONERS % $7
I
I
is
August 13, 1986 COMMISSIONERS %
I
The Planning Commission recommended approval of the
recommending approval of GPA/LU 86-4 to the City Council
Schlehuber
McFadden
Hall
Mc0ane
Holmes
Schramm
Negative Declaration and adopted the following Resolution
based on the findings contained therein, and further Marcus
recommending to the City Council Recommendations "A" -
11 3" .
RESOLUTION NO. 2572 RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF AN AMENDMENT
BY THE ADDITION OF WORDING TO ENCOURAGE THE ESTABLISHMENT
OF CHILDCARE FACILITIES AS A GOAL OF THE GENERAL PLAN.
(A communication from Carol McCart opposing the amendment,
Resolution No. 3-8687 from the Carlsbad Unified School
District supporting the amendment, arid a communication
noting a phone call from Kathy Riggers from North Coast YMCA supporting the amendment are on file with the Clerk.)
RECESS
The Planning Commission recessed at 6:50 p.m. and
reconvened at 6:53 p.m.
2) GPA/LU 86-6 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - A General Plan
ro THE TEXT OF THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN
Amendment to revise the General'Plan designation on
properties which have inappropriate designations.
(Continued from the July 30th meeting)
Mike Howes, Senior Planner, gave the presentation on this item as contained in the staff report and described the
location of the subject property with the aid of a map.
Mr. Howes gave the background of the Commission's previous
action on this matter and the reasons that staff is
recommending a General Plan amendment from RMH to RM as
contained in the staff report.
Commissioner McBane inquired why it would not be more
appropriate to consider this land use as part of the
Master Plan analysis for La Costa. Mr. Howes explained that the Master Plan analysis going on right now is Just
considering the undeveloped portions of the La Costa area that are owned by the La Costa Ranch Company.
that the La Costa Master Plan revisions began, this
property was and is not now owned by the La Costa Ranch
Company. Staff is just looking at the large undeveloped
acreages. There are a number of smaller vacant parcels
throughout La Costa that are not included in that study.
Chairman Schlehuber declared the continued public hearing
opened at 7:05 p.m. and issued the invitation to speak.
Tim Roberts, representing the La Costa Ranch Company, 6994
El Camino Real, Suite 202, addressed the Commission and
advised that he was here as the community developer in the
La Costa area, and as the banker involved in the subject
property. He gave the reasons why he is requestina the Commission to continue this matter for an additional two
months at which time the La Costa Ranch Company will have
full title to the subject .propert) and can fully represent
this property at a public hearing and possibly work out a
sensitive design with staff. (The current property owner
was not present to represent the property.)
At the time
$% 1
xx
X X
X
X
EXHIBIT 6
* Man 0 * Wb-0 m t3 ow u)
~taza
v) awd J b) kmm a d EOM a * #W-+ u
.[IQDHclUH w* W --
And how will kids raised by nannies and in day care centers turn out? ‘Worries are
from corporate boardrooms to Congress to Doonesbury cartoons. by Fern Schurn,
ONRAD LUNG, 37, vice president nationwide look at the re12
of Amtex Sportswear Inc., used to child care problems and
go to his Maphattan office every day recent Doonesbury strip. A child being conducted in coordination C a profoundly unhappy man. The picked up from a day care center tells his Bank Street College of E source of his pain was the source of his Gallup Organization. FORI
joy: Jennifer Lung, his then 1-year-old tions about child care, s
daughter. Lung’s wife, Ym, also works for and job satisfaction. Basec
Amtex, as manager of operations, and little Bank Street analysts mea
Jennifer spent 11 hours a day in a child of certain parental anxieti
care center near the family’s house on carry over into the workpl
Long Island. Says Lung: “I had a lot of HE RESULTS, whic
the table on page
thers are sharing I T sponsibilities but
trouble concentrating on my job. I had this
image of my girl crying, and it wouldn’t
leave me.” He thought about quitting to
stay home. After his parents moved next
door and took over as babysitters, his mind stress, and guilt associate
went back to work. But, he says, “the guilt child in someone else’s c
has not disappeared completely.” almost as likely as mothe
The first, heady, breaking-new-ground ologists, child psychologists, and other social job interferes with family 1
phase of the social experiment called dual- even more inclined to sac1
career parenting seems to be ending. In its tunities that would cost thc
place: a more reflective, and troubling, turn out. The notion that society would bene- their family. Nearly 30%
stage. More and more parents are asking survey said that they had
whether the higher salary, bigger title, or promotion, or transfer bec
extra professional recognition can make up meant less family time; 25
for leaving a toddler in tears each morning, gave the same response. P
or returning to a teen who is hurt and an- men and women sought
gry each night. Even parents who can af- job in order to spend mc
ford the best child care worry that it will families.
not provide the warmth and doting atten- A recent Stanford 1
tion they remember having as children. In a showed that husbands of
recent study of corporate women officers have more anxiety aboui
prepared by the executive search firm Hei- their wives do. Says Thov
drick & Struggles, the respondents ranked employees are willing to sacrifice work fessor emeritus of applie
quality time with children as the primary conducted the study: “A
personal sacrifice they made because of seems to insulate husbanc
their careers. stresses.” Michael Nicoli
Management psychologists agree that ager at Campbell Soup Cc
nothing tugs more insistently at executive Jersey, says he’s proof of
psyches these days than the fear of short- his two boys were young
REPORTER ASSOCIATE Susan Caminifi of his work time worry
changing the kids. Garry Trudeau, cartoonist
and father of three, captured the feeling in a
mother: “I was crying because all the other
children went home and you were late again,
but Mrs. Wicker gave me Oreos and let me
watch cartoons and I called her ‘Mommy’ by
mistake.” The mother looks at her child and
says, “You play hardball, kid.” The issue of
who should take care of the children is fast
emerging as the No. 1 source of executive
guilt. Says Dr. Lee Salk, professor of psy-
chology in psychiatry and pediatrics at New
York Hospital-Cornel1 Medical Center:
“Guilt is what parents are coming to talk to
me about.”
Nor is personal guilt the only worry. Soci-
scientists are analyzing how children raised
by babysitters and in day care centers will
fit if infants were able to spend their first few
months with their parents is driving a new
bill in Congress called the Family and Me&-
cal Leave Act. Warns Salk “Unless we pro-
vide good-quality child care, we are going to
see more problems in adolescents. These
kids are going to say to their parents: ‘Why
should I listen to you now when you weren’t
there when I needed you?’ ”
Corporations are beginning to discover
that more and more of their most valued
time, productivity, and possibly even ca-
reers to devote themselves to family mat-
ters. To see how working couples handle
the conflicting pressures of raising children
and holding down jobs, FORTUNE commis-
sioned a survey of 400 men and women
with children under 12. The study, the first
30 FORTUNE FEBRUARY 16, 1987
4 dszz
their day care center. However, he was qui
at ease when his wife, Diane, who works pz
time, was with them.
Parents generally do not wear their gu
on their sleeves, and those answering tl
FORTUNE survey were no exceptions. Mc
said they were very satisfied with the ch
care solutions they had found and were co
vinced that the children of dual-career co
ples are more independent, more social
adept, and have interesting role models fc
parents. But they also admitted to mar
anxieties: 61% worried that children wei
rushed to conform to parents’ schedules, ar
57% were concerned that children did nc
get enough attention.
More important, the survey showed th,
child care responsibilities take a toll on prl
ductivity. Some 41% of parents in the survc
lost at least one day’s work in the thre
months prior to the poll to care for famil
matters-tending a sick child or going to
school play-and nearly 10% took three t
five days off. Ellen Galinsky, director c
Work and Family Life Studies at Bank Streei
who designed the survey with colleagu
Diane Hughes, figures that these results wi
surprise most managers, since they shol
that in some cases child care is as strong a
influence on a worker’s performance as suc
predictable motivating factors as the numbe
of hours worked, the relationship with a su
pervisor-and even job security. Says Ga
linsky: “Our major finding is that problem:
with child care are the most significant pre
dictors of absenteeism and unproductiw
time at work.”
One glimpse of the productivity cost:
comes from a recent book, Chtldcare an(
Corporate Productivity, by John P. Fernandez
a manager of personnel services at AT&T
Fernandez found that 77% of women anc
73% of men he surveyed take time awaj
from work attending to their children-mak-
ing phone calls, ducking out for a long lunch
to go to a school play. That alone translates
into hundreds of millions of dollars in lost
output for U.S. corporations, he says.
Working parents seem to be trying to as-
suage their guilt by cutting corners on the
job-and that vexing situation is not likely to
change. The typical American family, with
dad at work and mom taking care of the kids,
is mainly the stuff of Ozzie and Harriet re-
runs. Less than 33% of families follow the
Nelson family model, vs. 48% 11 years ago,
Security is a father’s leg forBen11 Walker,
2, as he starts a day at My Other Mother’s, a
child care center in Alexandria, VirGnia.
1
FEBRUARY 16, 1987 FORTUNE 31
~- -. --- I__~ ~___ -
e. 0
And in a dramatic departure from the old help. A nanny, babysitter, (
ways, nearly half the mothers with children who stays with the child dL
less than 1 year old work. Some women do it perhaps the most convenier
for personal gratification; career opportuni- , care. Parents do not have
ties for women are greater than they ever up and schlep halfway acros:
have been. Others work because they must: The child has all the condor
One family in six is headed by a single, di- the opportunity to monopoli
vorced, or widowed woman. , ganizations. Regulations in some states, attention. But this is an exp A Conference Board survz 5 costs in major US. cities
nies who come for the day
$200 a week in Dallas, C
Francisco, and as much as To get around the high cos1
sponsor immigrants to wor
others risk tangling with tl
illegal aliens.
about $150 a week, room and board. Ma F ins are au pairs, YOL
Europe or rural parts of thi
the job as much for the ex1
in another part of the world I Au pairs in the program s
American Institute for Fore
necticut-based nonprofit o
week for 45 hours of chi housekeeping; parents also
tion $55 a week. Anothe
nized by the Experiment
Living, charges the same fl
Famiiy day care, in whic
dozen children are supervis
house, has several advan
adult every day, a chance
and economy. Some states
ters; others regulate only h
more than five children.
costs about $50 to $100 a
for a child under 5.
Most of the people responding to the Institutional day care CI FORTUNE survey said they did not have quire that a child be at lea much trouble making child care arrange- toilet trained. The Cod(
ments. But one of three parents of infants, ports that parents in Atlan
and one of four parents of 3- to 5-year-olds, child ratio. Wages tend to be low-an a week for a child under 5
reported that finding care was difficult. average of $8,000 a year for child care pro- York City counterparts I
About one-quarter of the fathers and moth- viders-and turnover is high, about 40% a $150. Parents like day carc
ers chose day care centers for their 1- to 5- year. Says Lawrence Schweinhart of the they are reliable and give
year-olds. The next most popular solutions: HigWScope Educational Research Founda- taste for learning and sucl
a babysitter who works in the house, and tion, a nonprofit child care development drinking from a cup and s
so-called family day care in someone else’s group in Ypsilanti, Michigan: “A parking lot centers tend to have inill
house. Not surprisingly, one-quarter of the attendant is paid the same as a child care departure times. And the parents of infants said they left them with worker. If we assign the same importance sick children, a situation t relatives. to someone who parks our cars as to those parents to consider “I dol
not reliably report whether they have been
treated with sensitive attention or blasC
inmerence. Quality in day care centers varies enor-
mously. States license the private for-profit
and not-for-profit centers, but not those run
by public agencies and, often, religious or-
OR LIVE-IN HELP
Infants as young as six weeks are enrolled at My OtherMother’s, a nonprofit center that
promotes its “loving developmental learningprogram to meet the needs of contemporary families.”
however, tend to govern simple criteria-
the height of children’s tables, the number
of toilets-and ignore such important mat-
ters as learning activities or the teacher-
32 FORTUNE FEBRUARY 16, 1987
0 0
Y ment of child care expenses, ’ working hours. At the very bottc 3 employees in the survey rank & and referral services, control
hours, and more part-time work
orities of working parents in coi
already offered many or all of the
were quite merent. They claim
time, the resource and referral
control over work schedule we
valuable company child care pol
HE MOST EXPENSIVE 1 a company can make tc
with children is to build a T care center. Only 150 con
taken this step and some, fin& too high, have dropped out.
months ago Kerry Clayton, the
Western Life Insurance in St. Pa ta, figured on spending $600,000
a building that would house We
child care center. Those plans
hold Clayton says not enough
were interested. Campbell Sou
part of a warehouse into a day ca
agement training. Galinsky explains that the 120 children in 1983, which is no
respondents indicated they wanted their sources for Child Care Manager
compensation tied to performance so that Jersey company. Campbell says ~
they could spend more money on child care. operation average $60 a week
She also says that the management training puts up about 60% of the
the parents had in mind was the kind that $350,000 a year, and the employ
makes supervisors more sensitive to em- rest. The company is planning to
ployees with child care needs. The next most facility for a total of 320 childrer
popular choices were work-family seminars, The advantages of such a cenl
subsidized child care, ability to use salary de- ous. Parents can drop in any tim
ductions for child care, partial reimburse- haps most important-know the
No need to call in sick: At Chicken Soup, a Minneapolis day care centerfor ill chila
chicken pox sufferers like Jamie Luecke, 3, center, and Benjamin Brausen, 4% are welo
heads to Hewlett-Packard’s Cujertino, California, ofice. Ybarra cares for six children in her house.
most upsetting four words in a toddler’s
vocabulary.
The variable quality of. child care means
that many parents will not be able to shed the
nagging doubts about what’s going on during
those long hours at the office. Whose prob-
lem is this? A case can be made that it is not
only the parents’ but the employers’ and ulti-
mately society’s. Says Bank Street’s Ga-
linsky: “Couples seem to feel that child care
is their problem alone. It’s not. It’s an institu-
tional problem. Families have changed much
faster than the institutions that the family re-
lies on.”
A growing number of corporations seem 2
to be trying to catch up. About 3,000 com- g
panies offer subsidized day care centers, fi-
nancial assistance for child care, or child
care referral services. That’s a jump of
50% since 1984. Dana Friedman, senior re-
search associate at the Conference Board,
says, “Child care is likely to be the fringe benefit of the 199Os, because being
sound for employees, it becomes good for
business.”
What do employees want from a company
in terms of child care help? FORTUNE asked
the working parents it surveyed which child
care benefits they would like their employers
to introduce and which benefits already in
place were most valuable. The two did not always correspond. At the top of the wish list are a pair of items that seem to have nothing
to do with child care: merit raises and man-
,
5 c
e e
LOOKING AHEAD
is guaranteeing the quality of the care. Com- paid professionals who can afford the fees.” ees want such a diversity of
panies benefit too, especially in recruiting Some companies have found ways to un- vices that an on-site center w
and retaining employees. “The day care cen- derwrite day care centers without paying the inappropriate.” The compan,
ter swayed me to come to Campbell when I entire bill or taking on the managerial head- consultants who go out to ev
left Johnson & Johnson,” says Robert Re- aches. Merck & Co. provided a grant to start centers and family-care horn
velle, a product marketing manager for a center in a vacant school near its Rahway, lists of approved centers and
Swanson Dinners. Alvin Stern, a research New Jersey, headquarters. The nonprofit employees to use. Steelcase
scientist at Hoffmann-La Roche in Nutley, center, run by a local group, covers most of ployees meet the costs of chil
, New Jersey, placed his three children in the its operating costs with fees; the rest comes ing flexible benefits: They ca company’s center. Says he: “I was a single from fund raising. their nonsalary compensatio!
parent for four years. During that time La costs instead of, say, dental ir
TILL MORE ATTRACTIVE for says a recent survey showed
effective-is a resource and referral reported that it made them m S service, which trains parents how to productive at work.
Roche supported me. For that, I really appre-
The problems with on-site day care are
not so obvious. Since the centers have lim-
ited openings, some employees get prefer- find quality child care and screens a commu- Companies that do not I+
entia1 treatment. Manufacturers tend to nity’s existing day care facilities. Steelcase into the resource and refen
build on-site day care at headquarters Inc., the office furniture manufacturer in their own can sign on one of
where their higher-paid employees work; Grand Rapids, Michigan, set up this service in the field that are popping often no child care is available at the fac- in 1980 after concluding that starting and op- US. IBM contracted in 198: tories. Says Robert Lurie, president of Re- erating a high-quality day care center would ton-based WorWFamily Dirt
sources for Child Care Management, a benefit too few employees to justify its profit child care consulting g
consulting firm: “You find situations where -costs. What’s more, says James C. Soule, paid the firm to establish
the people using the centers are the well- vice president of human resources, “employ- based family centers and opf
‘r
many companies-and far more cost- employees who used the IF ciate the company,”
’
L 2
Wilkeningspends his lunch hou
to daughter Rachel, 1, who has a
Other childrengo fora walk, abo
drug company put up the seed m
the center, which is located two m
headquarters zn Rahway, New Jc
___~
day care centers for IBM employees and
other families in communities all over the US. Says James Daly, manager of IBM’s
employee assistance programs: “We believe
a company shouldn’t go into a community
and sap its resources.” The BankAmerica
Foundation has underwritten a consortium
of corporations and government agencies
formed to make more and better child care
available in five California counties. The
three-year-old consortium has a $1.1-million
budget for recruiting, training, and helping
license day care workers.
For sheer cost-effectiveness, nothing
beats a facility for children too sick to go to
ployers, up 50% from a year ago, have
made some provision so that the mommies
and daddies of cold, flu, or chicken pox suf-
ferers can still report for work. The David
and Lucile Packard Foundation and Levi
Strauss & Co. funded a 17-bed children’s
infirmary that is attached to an independent
day care center in San Jose, California. 0th-
er companies arrange to have trained
nurses sent to the child at home. A group
of law and accounting firms in Tucson, Ari-
zona, pays $8 an hour for medical aides to
hold the hands of employees’ sick children.
A FORTUNE
nonprofit child care service: “The employ-
ers can’t even get a temporary for $8 an
hour to replace an absent secretary.” First
Bank System, a Minneapolis bank holding
company, pays 75% of the $26.26 a day for
each employee’s child who checks in to Though working fathers and mothers pretty much agree that they share equally in child care
Chicken Soup, a sick-child day care opera- responsibilities and that theirjobs interfere with family life, morefathers say they have refused a new
tion in Minneapolis. Susan Wolfe, Chicken job, promotion, or transfer that would take away from family time. Mothers are more likely to report
Soup’s executive director, figures First that theyfeel stress. Only 30.9% of the women polled in FORTUNE’S nationwide survey of 400 working
Bank loses $154 a day if a $40,000-a-year parents wanted more child care help from their companies. But over halfsaid they would like their
middle manager misses work to take care employers to offerflexible working hours and provide subsidized day care centers.
of a sick child. She says, “Chicken Soup
saves the company 87%, or almost $135 a feel comfortable about-or even when the long-term studies. And the academic litera-
day.“ toddlers move on through school to adoles- ture concentrates on day care centers, pay-
Companies have devised some innova- cence. The big questions, increasingly raised ing little attention to other alternatives.
tive ways to help finance child care. Zayre by social researchers: What kind of children Compounding the confusion, male re-
Corp. gives child care reimbursements of are we producing by proxy parenting? How searchers generally seem to defend tradi-
up to $20 a week to employees at its head- will a generation of kids raised like no other tional child rearing, while their female
quarters with preschoolers. Cafeteria-style generation before turn out? counterparts more often champion the ar-
employee-benefit programs, like those of- rangements that free mothers from the bur-
OR ALL THE IMPORTANCE and poi- den. Militant feminists tend to dismiss the
gnancy associated with the topic, child possibility that day care may not be an unmit-
care research is riddled with prob- igated blessing; the researchers who worry F lems. The social scientists have not about day care’s effects accuse them of ad-
fered by Steelcase, are growing more popu-
lar. Each year Chemical Bank allows
employees to designate up to $15,000 in
payroll deductions that can be used for sup-
plementary medical coverage, legal fees, or figured out how to separate the influence of hering to the old Bolshevik credo that truth
child care costs. The bank disperses the child care practices from the many other fac- is what’s good for the revolution.
money once a quarter in pretax dollars. tors that affect human development. Since Still, researchers have come up with a few The worries about child care do not end the rise of the dual-career couple is relatively generalities that most can agree with. One is
when the kids are in a place mom and dad new, researchers have not yet produced that happy parents-includmg those who are
FEBRUARY 16,1987 FORTUNE 35 --______--
-___
day care centers for IBM employees and
other families in communities all over the
US. Says James Daly, manager of IBM’s
employee assistance programs: “We believe
a company shouldn’t go into a community
and sap its resources.” The BankAmerica
Foundation has underwritten a consortium
of corporations and government agencies
formed to make more and better child care
available in five California counties. The
three-year-old consortium has a $1.1-million
budget for recruiting, training, and helping
For sheer cost-effectiveness, nothing beats a facility for children too sick to go to
ployers, up 50% from a year ago, have
made some provision so that the mommies
and daddies of cold, flu, or chicken pox suf-
ferers can still report for work. The David
and Lucile Packard Foundation and Levi
Strauss & Co. funded a 17-bed children’s
infirmary that is attached to an independent
day care center in San Jose, California. 0th-
er companies arrange to have trained
nurses sent to the child at home. A group
of law and accounting firms in Tucson, Ari-
zona, pays $8 an hour for medical aides to
hold the hands of employees’ sick children.
Says Martha Rothman, executive director
of Tucson Association for Child Care Inc., a
nonprofit child care service: “The employ-
ers can’t even get a temporary for $8 an
hour to replace an absent secretary.” First
Bank System, a Minneapolis bank holding
company, pays 75% of the $26.26 a day for
each employee’s child who checks in to Though workang fathers and mothers pretty much agree that they share equally in child care
Chicken soup, a sick-child day care opera- responsibaJities and that theirjobs interfere with family lge, more fathers say they have refused a new
tion in Minneapolis. Susan Wolfe, Chicken job, promotion, or transfer that would take away from family time. Mothers are more likely to report
Soup’s executive director, figures First that they feel stress. Only 30.9% of the women polled in FORTUNE’S nationwide survey of 400 working
Bank loses $154 a day if a $40,000-a-year parents wanted more child care helpfrom their companies. But over halfsaid they would like their
middle manager misses work to take care employers to offerflexible working hours and provide subsidized day care centers.
of a sick child. She says, “Chicken Soup
saves the company 87%, or almost $135 a feel comfortable about-or even when the long-term studies. And the academic litera-
day.” toddlers move on through school to adoles- ture concentrates on day care centers, pay-
Companies have devised some innova- cence. The big questions, increasingly raised ing little attention to other alternatives.
tive ways to help finance child care. Zayre by social researchers: What kind of children Compounding the confusion, male re-
Corp. gives child care reimbursements of are we producing by proxy parenting? How searchers generally seem to defend tradi-
up to $20 a week to employees at its head- will a generation of kids raised like no other tional child rearing, while their female
quarters with preschoolers. Cafeteria-style generation before turn out? counterparts more often champion the ar-
employee-benefit programs, like those of- rangements that free mothers from the bur-
OR ALL THE IMPORTANCE and poi- den. Militant feminists tend to dismiss the
gnancy associated with the topic, child possibility that day care may not be an unmit-
care research is riddled with prob- igated blessing; the researchers who worry F lems. The social scientists have not about day care’s effects accuse them of ad-
fered by Steelcase, are growing more popu-
lar. Each year Chemical Bank allows
employees to designate up to $15,000 in
payroll deductions that can be used for sup-
plementary medical coverage, legal fees, or figured out how to separate the influence of hering to the old Bolshevik credo that truth
zhild care costs. The bank disperses the child care practices from the many other fac- is what’s good for the revolution.
money once a quarter in pretax dollars. tors that affect human development. Since Still, researchers have come up with a few
The worries about child care do not end the rise of the dual-career couple is relatively generalities that most can agree with. One is
when the kids are in a place mom and dad new, researchers have not yet produced that happy parents-including those who are
A FORTUNE
FEBRUARY 16, 1987 FORTUNE 35
~~ _~__._~ _.
happily employed-produce happy babies.
Another is that the best child care arrange-
ments are the ones with nannies or babysit-
ters who can most closely simulate the
mother-child relationship.
The tenuous consensus rests largely on an
important child development theory that is
gathering more and more followers. The the-
ory rejects the Freudian notion that chil-
dren’s personalities are molded mainly by
dramatic events or transitions through such
major developmental phases as the oral and
anal stages. Instead, it holds that develop-
ment takes place in a long continuum of
important moments--countless daily ex-
changes between the mother and the child
that shape how the youngster later relates to
other people.
The theory does not demand that mom
(or dad) stay home with the kids. Says
Stanley Spiegel, supervising analyst at the William A. White Psychoanalytic Institute
in New York “What’s most important is
that the child is given a sense that he is a
worthwhile human being.” That can come
from almost any person who is sensitive to
a child’s needs, and who has enough time
to spend with a child. But this notion raises
serious questions about group day care.
How can even the most dedicated child
care worker provide those exchanges for
several children at a time? Deprived of that
interaction, Spiegel says, youngsters often
lack self-esteem.
The champions of group day care for all
children at any age argue that it encourages
independence for both th
mother. Betty Friedan, fen TAKING LEAVE of The Feminine Mystique,
Washington is getting into the child sists that children, regardl
- care business. In mid-January the Su- som in child care. “It’s goo
preme Court ruled that states could re- It’s best for children not to
quire employers to grant short, unpaid strings and just be at home,
disability leaves for new mothers. But Bettye M. Caldwell, profes
the court ruled against preferential of the University of Arkans
treatment for pregnant women a week “Children have a strong urg
later. It said the few states that do not er children. And study after
pay unemployment benefits to dis- , children in quality day care c
abled workers need not give them to nitive loss or feel any less
women who leave their jobs because parents.”
of pregnancy. Meanwhile, the House
HE EXPERTS who d
worried about the effc
by proxy on infants. ‘ T renowned child care
and Senate are about to hold hearings
on a bill that would require employers
to grant up to 18 weeks unpaid lea
for both mothers and fathers.
Parental leave policies at many large US.-Edward Zigler, direc
corporations are even more generous Center in Child Developn
than the bill would legislate. But barely Policy at Yale University half of US. companies offer extended Gamble, director of the E&
maternity leaves, and business lobby- Children’s Center in Erie,
ists are revving up to fight the bill. recently reviewed dozens (
Paul Franson, who owns a public rela- portant child care studies. ‘I
tions agency in San Jose, California, ar- “Alternatives to infant care
gues that maternity leaves are costly available to working couple
and disruptive. In six years the issue be with their babies during
never came up among his 45-member of life.” Their recomme
staff. Now two women are pregnant months of paid leave for bc
and three others are new mothers. He Jay Belsky, professor of 1
jokes: “We’ve thought about putting ment at Pennsylvania St;
birth control in the water.” says infants in day care rur
velopmental ~culties. Th
become aggressive childre1
even resisting the routines of school. ducted in quality day care settings. “The plagued by problems with schoc
Some studies show that children who lousy centers won’t let a researcher near inclined to get into trouble. Whi spend their early years in day care centers . the place,” says Yale’s Zigler. In the pro- is that the youngsters who arc are growing up dismayingly difTerent from grams attended by children of low-income stay inside are missing some 1 those who stay at homk. A 1985 study of families, one worker may tend 18 cribs or parts of childhood. Says Dale B, kindergartners and first-graders who spent place 25 toddlers in front of the television ect associate with School-Age their &st year of life at the University of all day. Says Zigler: “If a mother treated Project at Wellesley College: ‘“I North Carolina’s highly regarded day care her child the way some centers care for go into the neighborhood, play center were found to be more likely to hit, children, we’d accuse her of neglect.” and baseball with the other ki
kick, push, threaten, swear, and argue than difference between being imp1
VEN NEGLECTFUL CARE is better being free.”
than none. Researchers maintain that Society will not know the cc
working parents leave a half-million of the new child-rearing pattern
preschool children at home alone at Meantime, the phenomenon o
home with babysitters, with babysitters least part of the day. Child care experts, in- career couple is not going to go
outside the home, and in group day care. cluding those at WorWFamily Directions, ewgeneration before them,
The study found no differences between say that alarming number is a conservative reerists will be wanting the be
babies raised with their mothers or by ba- one. In addition, seven million “latchkey” children. What they must kec
bysitters, but concluded that group care in- children from 6 to 12 years old fend for says Zigler, is that “when paren
fants were more apathetic, less attentive, themselves after school until their parents care, they are not just buying a
E I permits them to go to work. Ti.
their home-reared counterparts. In 1983 re-
searchers compared 122 Detroit infants
who were cared for in four different set-
tings-at home with their mothers, at
and less responsive and verbal than the return home from work.
others. Those who spent the most hours in So far research on latchkey children has ing an environment that determ day care situations were the least well. yielded mixed results. Some experts say velopment of the child.” Corpc adjusted. they learn independence and self-manage- society need to keep that in m
These findings probably reflect the best ment, while others conclude they are beset the sake of both present and
outcomes, since studies are generally con- by fears, victimized by older siblings, ployees and citizens.
FEBRUARY 16,1987 F
ZIP CODE
’NUMBER OF FAMILY DAY CARE HOMES
’ *+NUMBER OF FAMILY DAYCARE HOME CHILD SPACES
3NUMBER OF CHILD CARE CENTERS
,: 4NUMBER OF
CHILD CARE CENTER SPACES
5++NUMBER OF EXEMPT FACILITIES
‘NUMBER OF EXEMPT CHILD SPACES
I Total # facilities
21
r
105
5
301 -
0
0
(add SI, 3 and 5 above) = 26
Zip Code Ages 1980 1990
2
9 0-4 years 2,834 4 y 233
5-9 years 2,566 3,679
10-14 years 2 y 968 3,631
f
TOTALS
0-4 years
5-9 years
10-74 years
4
TOTALS
0-4 years
5-9 years
10-14 years
TOTALS
0-4 years
5-9 years
10-14 years
TOTALS
8,368 11,483
0 0 __
CHILDCARE RESOURCE SERVICE * 1033 Cudahy Place San Diego, (
San Diego 275-4800 * Escondido 743-7919 * Encinitas 753-3755
SUMMARY OF NEEDS FOR CHILD CARE IN 92008 AS OF FEBRUARY 6, 1987:
Ratio of child spaces (406) to estimated children needing care (6,798):
1:16.5 (one space for every 16.5 children).
Ratio of child spaces (406) to total child population 0-13 (11,483):
1:28.3 (one space for every 28.3 children).
-- ::
ESTIMATED CHILD POPULATION NEEDING CARE IN SRA:
11,483 1990 approximate child population 0-13
X
59% national % children of working mothers
X
59.2%
% children (national average) placed in formal care
- -
6,798
estimate n” of children 0-13 needing care in SRA
0 -- 0 ,.
CHILDCARE RESOURCE SERVICE 1033 Cudahy Place San Diego, C
San Diego 275-4800 Escondido 743-7919 Encinitas 753-3755
CHILD CARE COSTS
(per week)
Range - Zip Low High
92008
Infants - Centers Not available
Infants - FDCH $25.00 $1 20.00
Preschool - Centers $56.25 $ 68.75
Preschool - FDCH $25.00 $120.00
*: School Age - Centers $56.25 $ 68.75 -+
School Age - FDCH $45.00 $100.00
date. rid(/ & w
* W
San Marcos Unified School District
270 San Marcos Blvd , San Marcos, California 92069-2797 61 9-744-47 76
July 29, 1986
P1 anning Commission City of Carl sbad 1200 Elm Avenue Carlsbad, CA 92008
RE: GPA/LU 86-4 - CITY OF CARLSBAD - A Genera? Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use Element to include the encouragement of childcare in the community as a goal of the General Plan
Gent 1 emen :
The San Marcos Unified School District Board of Trustees at its regular meeting of July 28, 1986, voted unanimously to support the intent of Resolution 2572 recommending approval of GPA/LU 86-4.
The Board of Trustees commends the Commission on their efforts to encourage and support the establishment of childcare facilities. I=------+ Leonard Baxter ----
Acting Superintendent of Schools
LRB:ak
* 0 0
I. *
' 'Carlsbad Journal
Decreed A Legal Newspaper by the Superior Court of Sun Diego County
Mail all correspondence regarding public notice advertising to
North Coast Publishers, Inc. corporate offices: P.O. Box 878, Encinitas, CA 92024 (619) 753-6543
Proof of Publication
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ss.
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO,
I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the county aforesaid;
I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a party toor interested in the above entitlec
I am principal clerk of the printer of the Carlsbad Journal a newspaper of general ci
published twice weekly in the City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, a
newspaper is published for the dissemination of local news and intelligence of a general charc
which newspaper at all times herein mentioned had and still has a bona fide subscription list 1
subscribers, and which newspaper has been established, printed and published at regular in
the said City of Carlsbad, County of San Diego, State of California, for a period exceeding one
preceding the date of publication of t
hereinafter referred to; and that the
which the annexed is a printed copy,
published in each regular and entire iss
newspaper and not in any supplement t
the following dates, to-wit:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that January 31,
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING GPAILU 86-4
................................. the City Council ofthe CityofCarls- bad will hold a public hearing at
i the 'City Council Chambers. 1201) Elm Avenue. Carlsbad, California, at 6:OO P.M.. on Tuesday: February 10. 1987. to consider approval of a General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use Element to in- clude the encouragement of child- care in the community as a goal of the General Plan. ................................. If You have any questions regard- ing this matter. please call the Planning Department at 438-1161. Ifyou challenge the General Plan Amendment in coui2. 9011. may be limited to raising only those issues
YOU Or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspon-
dence delive'red to theCityofCarls- bad at or prior to the public hearing. Apdlicant: City of Carlsbad CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL '3 4500: January 31. 1987
.................................
................................
................................
. - ~- ~. . __~ I certify under penalty of perjury that the foregoin:
correct. Executed at Carlsbad, County of San Die California on the 31st
day of c an11 a.rv - 987
- 1 d .dA,- / Clerk of
#202-2M-7 86
, a NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING 0
re
1 4 '8 9 GPA/LU 86-4
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the City Council of the City of Carlsbad will hold a pi
hearing at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbad, California, at 6:i
on Tuesday, February 10, 1987, to consider approval of a General Plan Amendment to
the Land Use Element to include the encouragement of childcare in the community as
of the General Plan.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please call the Planning Departme
at 438-1161.
If you challenge the General Plan Amendment in court, you may be limited to raisin
those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this no
or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Carlsbad at or prior to the
hearing .
APPLICANT: City of Carlsbad
PUBLISH: January 31, 1987 CARLSBAD CITY COUNCIL
@ NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING w
4 'Y c
; 4 'e 7
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning Commission of the City of Carlsbad
hold a public hearing .at the City Council Chambers, 1200 Elm Avenue, Carlsbz
California, at 6:OO p.m. on Wednesday, July 30, 1986, to consider approval (
General Plan Amendment to amend the Land Use Element to include the
encouragement of childcare in the community as a goal of the General Plan.
Those persons wishing to speak on this proposal are cordially invited to ati
the public hearing.
Department at 438-5591.
If you challenge the General Plan Amendment in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing
described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Citj
Carlsbad at or prior to the public hearing.
If you have any questions please call the Planning
CASE FILE: GPA/LU 86-4
APPLICANT: CITY OF CARLSBAD
PUBLISH: July 19 , 1986
CITY OF CARLSBAD PLANNING OMMISSION
<
t (Form A
. ' 1.1 9 * 4 '1 6
TO: CITY CLERK'S OFFICE .> *_ 1s _-
FROM: Planning Department
RE: PUBLIC HEARING REQUEST
Attached are the materials necessary for you to notice
CPA/LU 86-4 - CITY OF CARLSBAD
for a public hearing before the City Council.
Please notice the item for the Council meeting of
Thank you.
/
/' .2 ?//I
Assistant City Manager Date
-15-