Reducing Barriers for Childcare Facilities, Part 2

As described in Part 1 of this blog series, once the policy support for childcare has been established, planners can start to explore ways in which their land use codes can be updated to support childcare facilities in their communities. Zoning and development regulations that severely limit where these facilities can be located and under what circumstances can add time, expense, and uncertainty to a project.

Planning policies can be structured to eliminate zoning barriers to childcare facility development across cities and counties. This section includes best practices in childcare center zoning throughout Washington and in other states.

State Law Related to the Location of Childcare Facilities

Cities can’t prohibit family home childcare businesses in residential or commercial zones in Washington per RCW 26.70A.450. This implies that cities should allow this use in residential or commercial zones through an approval process (by right or discretionary). However, if cities do impose conditions, per state law they are only allowed to do so as long as these conditions are not more restrictive than those imposed on other residences or facilities in the same zone. In practice, many cities do impose conditional use permits and other zoning requirements on childcare providers operating out of an individual’s home (e.g. family home providers) and located in residential zones, causing additional burden on existing providers and sidelining many prospective family home providers.

Also note that in 2023, the Washington State Legislature approved House Bill 1199, which prevents homeowners’ associations and landlords from unreasonably restricting family home providers.

Reviewing Zoning and Development Regulations to Support Childcare Facilities

Examples of supportive regulatory changes that local governments can implement include the following:

• Modifying zoning codes to allow childcare facilities in most districts.
• Avoiding overuse of the conditional use permit process.
• Allowing adaptive reuse of vacant office spaces for childcare facilities.
• Eliminating requirements for a minimum distance between facilities.
• Reducing or waiving off-street parking requirements for childcare facilities.
• Partnering with other organizations to utilize outdoor play spaces.

Let’s look at each of these options in more detail.

Permit childcare facilities in most zoning districts

Cities and counties should modify their zoning codes to allow both smaller and larger childcare facilities in nearly all zones except those that are incompatible, like open space and heavy industrial areas. For example, Seattle allows childcare centers and family home providers in nearly all zones, including neighborhood residential zones.

Lakewood amended its Comprehensive Plan to allow childcare centers in most commercial zones and in residential zones for buildings of assembly. Lakewood’s zoning changes expanded outright permitting of childcare centers from 4% to 52% of its total area (see Lakewood Ordinance No. 794, Amendment 11, adopted November 20, 2023). This ordinance will go into effect in January 2025.

Another example is Clatsop County, Oregon, which is proposing amendments to its zoning and development regulations to support childcare facilities, including the following:

• Family childcare homes, with up to 16 children at a time, would be permitted outright in all areas zoned for residential and commercial purposes.
• Childcare centers with less restrictive size limitations on the number of children would be permitted outright in commercial and some industrial zones and conditionally in residential zones.
• Parking requirements would be waived for any childcare centers located in the aforementioned zones.

Use the conditional use permit process sparingly

With all the state laws and regulations that childcare centers already have to comply with, the issues a local planner needs to mitigate via a conditional use process (CUP) are usually narrow. Where a CUP is absolutely required, there is a strong preference to use an ‘administrative’ or ‘minor’ CUP that requires no hearings, costs less, and is approved by land use planning staff.

One example of this approach is the City of Kent, which changed its land use tables to reduce the number of land uses requiring a CUP and then created a new permit called a minor CUP to allow for easier administrative review. A minor CUP can be obtained without a hearing with the decision issued by the city’s planning manager. This type of permit is focused on lower-impact uses the city wanted the ability to allow in a broader list of districts while considering impacts and applying conditions as needed. They have retained the public notice aspect by requiring a Notice of Application for minor CUPs.

Similarly, Los Angeles County is exploring amending its zoning code to allow childcare centers by right (approval if it conforms with codes) in all zones except heavy industrial — or with a ministerial site plan review that only requires county staff review and approval and does not require a public hearing. Ministerial approval for childcare centers would be needed solely to confirm compliance with a standard set of conditions, such as hours of operation, traffic and circulation, and parking.

Allow adaptive reuse of vacant office spaces for childcare facilities

This approach is especially applicable to mixed-use areas that are experiencing high post-pandemic vacancy rates, like downtowns and urban villages.

New York City’s Office Adaptive Reuse Study (January 2023) includes a recommendation to “provide financial incentives for affordable housing and childcare facilities.” This includes a tax incentive to support mixed-income housing within conversions and implementing a property tax abatement for retrofitting space for childcare centers.

In Seattle, the Childcare Near You Ordinance, passed in August 2020, allows childcare centers at the street level along key pedestrian streets in mixed-use zones. This zoning reform can facilitate adaptive reuse of vacant street-level office spaces in these zones.

Eliminate requirements for a minimum distance between facilities

Some cities require childcare facilities to be located a certain distance apart from each other or only allow a certain number within certain zoning districts. These restrictions are often unnecessary given the need in most communities and the lack of issues that occur when facilities are near each other. To better accommodate the need, Seattle recently eliminated dispersion requirements for childcare centers in multi-family areas (see Seattle Municipal Code Sec. 23.45.570).

Reduce off-street parking requirements and establish agreements to meet outdoor space requirements using public parks, where needed

Minimum parking requirements are often too restrictive for childcare facilities since most customers come and go and don’t stay at the facility all day. Local governments can reduce or waive off-street parking requirements for these facilities, especially in areas that are served by public transit and/or if there is ample on-street parking nearby. Austin, Texas is one example of a city that eliminated on-site parking requirements for childcare centers.

The Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families (DCYF) requires 75 square feet of outdoor space per child for childcare centers. In many cities within the state, it is difficult for childcare providers to find facilities that satisfy this outdoor space requirement onsite, especially in dense urban cores. Cities can help alleviate this problem by establishing agreements with DCYF and parks and recreation departments that allow childcare facilities to use adjacent parks to satisfy their outdoor space requirements, as is currently done in San Francisco, California.

Process Improvements

Cities and counties can also improve their permitting processes to support childcare facilities in more innovative ways, such as:

• Creating a user-friendly childcare facility development guide: For example, Los Angeles County's toolkit, Childcare for All: How to Develop and Renovate Early Care & Education Facilities in Los Angeles County, has served as a helpful guide for agency staff and childcare providers and can be used as a template.
• Centralizing childcare facility development resources for providers: The Los Angeles County Department of Public Health (LADPH) Office for the Advancement of Early Care & Education shapes policy recommendations; facilitates planning; and provides a range of services to improve the availability, quality, and access to early care and education programs. LADPH has proposed creating a webpage that would include user-friendly summaries of state and local code requirements, permitting processes, fees, and a directory of staff that help with processing permits for childcare facilities.
• Offering specialized childcare permitting coordinators: Several departments in Los Angeles County, including regional planning, public works, fire, and building & safety have designated staff onsite to support childcare provider applicants throughout the permitting process.

Permit Fees and Other Incentives

Many local governments charge the same impact fees for childcare facilities that they do for other, more intense uses, which can then pose a barrier to the establishment of affordable, high-quality, and timely childcare services. In response, cities and counties can reduce or waive certain permit fees.

In 2021, Washington adopted changes to RCW 82.02.060 in support of impact fee exemptions for childcare facilities. Local governments are restricted from imposing impact fees for childcare facilities that are greater than fees for other similar uses. Reductions or waivers of impact fees for low-income housing, childcare facilities, and developments with a “broad public purpose” are permitted “provided that the impact fees for such development activity shall be paid from public funds other than impact fee accounts,” per RCW 82.02.060(2). Some local governments cover these costs through the general fund or other permit fees.

Cities may also provide an exemption from impact fees for low-income housing or childcare facilities under certain circumstances. For example, Olympia provides 80% and 100% exemptions for early learning facilities under certain circumstances. Childcare providers and advocates can encourage their local officials to adopt a similar exemption.

Cities can also offer other incentives for childcare facilities, including encouraging development through density bonuses, provided that certain adverse impacts from the increased density — such as more demand for affordable housing and childcare for downtown workers — are mitigated through an investment in facilities. In Seattle Municipal Code Sec. 23.49.012, if an applicant seeks approval of bonus development, it must execute a voluntary agreement to provide affordable housing or childcare facilities by making a defined contribution to a city fund to develop these facilities or by developing the housing or childcare facilities.

Partnerships

Another best practice is for local governments to support public-private partnerships for childcare facilities. These partnerships can include a local government working to incorporate childcare facilities into public buildings, like libraries or community centers, or encouraging others to incorporate facilities into affordable or workforce housing developments and mixed-use buildings.

For example, the Human Services Element of Bellevue’s Comprehensive Plan references working with community agencies to provide childcare services that meet the diverse needs of the community. Bellevue Municipal Code Sec. 20.20.170(E) includes requirements for a “childcare service use” located in a community facility.

In Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, the city offers municipal-enabled childcare services in their main office.

Conclusion and Additional Resources

This blog series provided an overview of the need for childcare facilities (both large and small) throughout the state and some potential ways in which communities can reduce barriers for the development of new facilities to help close the gap.

While some issues, like the need for high-quality, well-compensated staff, are usually outside the control of local governments, other barriers, like zoning and incentives, are well within their realm. Whether starting small through incremental changes or taking a bolder, more comprehensive approach, local governments should start reviewing their plans (including comprehensive plans as part of the current periodic update cycle), policies, regulations, and incentives for opportunities to make it easier for providers to establish high-quality childcare options in their communities.

For more information, see these examples and additional resources:

• Arlington County (VA): Childcare, A Land Use Research Report — Includes an existing conditions analysis, best practices, and more.
• LADPH: Childcare and Your City - How Cities Can Increase Access to Childcare — Provides city and county planning staff with best practices and resources.
• Washington State Department of Commerce
  • Washington Childcare Collaborative Task Force – Provides outcomes, including reports and data, in response to legislation in 2018 and 2019. Also see Child Care Partnership Grants and the recent awards of over $2 million to help address the highest priority childcare shortages.
  • Early Learning Facilities Program – Helps providers expand, remodel, purchase, or construct early learning facilities and classrooms aimed at low-income households.
• Washington State DCYF: Childcare and Early Learning Need and Supply Data — Offers maps illustrating the estimated percent of childcare needs for families currently met by licensed childcare, preschool, and/or subsidized childcare by county, school district, legislative district, and zip code in Washington state.
• Washington STEM: State of the Children Dashboard — Includes childcare supply and demand data, Working Connections Childcare subsidy take-up rates, Childcare Stabilization Grant awards and zip code factors, among other resources.