Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRESOLUTIONS - 12051989 - 89-769 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on December 5 1989 , by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, t1cPeak and Tort akson NOES: Supervisors Fanden and Schroder ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None RESOLUTION NO. 89/ 769 SUBJECT: In the Matter of Adopting Findings in the Approval of the Appeal Filed by Volunteers of America and in the Denial of the Appeals Filed by the Citizens for a Safe Martinez and City of Martinez , pertaining to a proposal to establish a Rehabilitative Shelter for Homeless Individuals (File DP3014-89) in the Martinez Area. WHEREAS, on May 16 , 1989 the Board of Supervisors considered a request for waiver of a development plan for a proposed rehabili- tative shelter, and after reviewing the matter, the Board voted to deny the waiver request and to require submission of a development plan application for noticed public hearing before the County Planning Commission; and WHEREAS, on May 22, 1989 an application for development plan approval to convtrt an existing church, at #1391 Shell Avenue in the Martinez area, to a rehabilitative shelter for men and women with a maximum occupancy of 66 individuals, was received by the Community Development Department; and WHEREAS, in accord with State and County Guidelines of the California Environmental Qualify Act (CEQA) , an initial environmental study was conducted on the proposed project which concluded that it would not generate any potential environmental impacts, and accordingly, a Negative Declaration was issued and posted -for this project on May 31, 1989; and WHEREAS, on June 8, 1989 the City of Martinez filed an appeal of the Negative Declaration determination; and WHEREAS, the County Planning Commission considered the proposed rehabilitative shelter at several public hearings, the first of which was conducted on June 13 , 1989; and WHEREAS, on September 26, 1989 the County Planning Commission approved the proposed rehabilitative shelter subject to the requirement that occupancy be limited to women only and not in excess of 35 women; and WHEREAS, the findings of the County Planning Commission review are contained in Commission Resolution #47-1989 attached as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS; following the Commission action, three more appeals were filed on the approval action by Volunteers of America, City of Martinez and Citizens for a Safe Martinez (James F. Beiden) ; and WHEREAS, on November 14, 1989 after providing notice as required by law, the Board of Supervisors reviewed and considered the four appeals, staff reports, written and oral testimony and exhibits received at the public hearing; RESOLUTION NO. 89/769 2 WHEREAS, this Board, having reviewed the correspondence and testimony from Citizens for a Safe Martinez, the City of Martinez, other agencies, groups and individuals describing concerns that the proposed shelter might increase crime rates and diminish property values in the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, this Board, having reviewed the reports of the County Sheriff-Coroner' s Office and City of Martinez Police Department comparing the shelter to the temporary shelter that was recently operated at the Concord National Guard Armory and expressing concern that similar crime and security concerns would result from the proposed shelter, and thereby increase demand for police service calls to the neighborhood; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that on November 14, 1989 the Board of Supervisors DENIED the appeals on the adequacy of the environmental review conducted on this project and' found that the Negative Declaration determination is appropriate for this project insofar as the project has no potential for generating any potential environmental impacts; further, this Board; found that the concerns expressed about purported traffic and parking impacts from the project to be invalid insofar as the project residents will be almost entirely reliant on public transit facilities as a means of transportation, and that private vehicles using the site will be largely restricted to those few owned by shelter staff and those associated with the delivery of goods and services to the shelter; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board finds that the comparisons made by project opponents to the former Concord shelter (and other local shelters) are not valid insofar as the Concord shelter was run as an "open shelter" in which no screening procedures were practiced, whereas the approved shelter will be highly selective in the types of individuals who are eligible for admission (e.g. , the individuals must have a goal-oriented capability) ; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board finds that the crime and security problems associated with the Concord shelter and other local shelters will not recur with the approved shelter because: 1) The screening procedures will only-' accept individuals as client-residents who are likely to conduct themselves in an orderly and civil manner, and who would not be disruptive to either the neighborhood or . to the operation of the shelter; 2) The program will create an environment for the residents that will discourage activities or behaviors that might be . objectionable to neighbors. From the time of their admission, the client-residents will be required to develop and follow individualized programs to assist their progress in establishing self-sufficiency. Each program will provide for a schedule with a complete set of daily activities (counseling, training, work programs) to keep the clients pre-occupied with attaining the objective of becoming a self-reliant member of mainstream society. 3 ) The imposed conditions require that the shelter operator initiate prior and on-going coordination with local police agencies. The coordination is intended to establish and maintain shelter conditions that will promote neighborhood security. In so doing, real and perceived security risks, and attendant demand for police services, associated with the shelter will be no greater than those associated with other existing uses RESOLUTION NO. 89/769 3 in the neighborhood, and are likely to be considerably less. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors ; DENIED 'the appeals on the merits of the development plan application filed by Citizens for a Safe Martinez and City of Martinez; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors GRANTED the appeal filed by Volunteers of America (VOA) and'SUSTAINED ' the approval of the County Planning Commission subject to the modifi- cations generally described below: The gender restrictions on eligible client residents are eliminated; - The occupancy limit is initially set at 35 persons with provision for the possibility of increasing the occupancy to a maximum of 54 persons; After one year of operation, the Board of Supervisors shall review the success of the shelter in establishing and maintaining neighborhood compatibility in complying with conditions of approval; and the Board may further modify the project requirements at that time; - Restrictions on exterior religious symbols are eliminated based on the legal opinion contained in the November 30, 1989 memo from County Counsel, and recommendation from the Director of Community Development; Limited provision for on-site client parking as requested by VOA; Rejection of the VOA request to modify the screening proce- dures; compliance with the Social Services Department contract; and advisory board composition requirements of the Planning Commission; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the forementioned modifications described above are incorporated in the attached revised conditions of approval attached as Exhibit B; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Board of Supervisors finds that the above modifications can be accommodated without any risk that the approved activity could be incompatible with or a danger to the neighborhood; and BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the approved shelter satisfies all of the findings required for development plan applications as specified in Section 84-50. 1606 of the Ordinance Code as provided below: 1. Required Code Finding: The application shall be consistent with the purpose of the Retail-Business District. Board Finding: The proposed application is consistent with the Retail-Business zoning affecting this site insofar as the approved shelter constitutes an eleemosynary use which is one of the uses expressly permitted within the R-B district. It is also consistent with the Retail-Business General Plan designation for this site. 2. Required Code Finding: The application shall be architec- turally compatible with other uses in the vicinity, both inside and outside the district. Board Finding: The approved shelter involves only minor exterior changes to the existing structures on the property. RESOLUTION NO. 89/ 769 4 No improvements have been approved that would be incompati- ble with nearby uses. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that this Board makes the following findings and supporting findings concerning this proposed shelter application: 1. Finding: The approved shelter shall not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the County. Supporting Finding: The approved shelter must satisfy all health and structural code requirements prior to commencement of operations. Moreover, the applicant is required to work closely with local police agencies to endeavor to resolve the concerns of those agencies. This coordination is to begin prior to the commencement of shelter operations and extend for the duration of the shelter. During the initial start-up, the operation will be monitored by the County. The shelter will only be allowed to use a portion of the approved potential capacity ( 54 persons) . The applicant will not be able to attain the maximum potential capacity unless he can substantiate on the basis of operational experience that the expanded occupancy will be compatible with the surrounding uses. Further, after one year' s operation the shelter shall be reviewed by the Board of Supervisors to assess any concerns with the shelter operation, and to impose appropriate corrective measures. At that time, the shelter operation may be modified to allow habitation of the existing resi- dence by program client/residents. 2 . Finding: It shall not adversely affect the orderly development of property within the County. Supporting Finding: The approved shelter will be compatible with nearby existing uses. The 1975 Vine Hill/Pacheco General Plan provides for residential, commercial and industrial uses in the vicinity. The improvements to the exterior of the church (painting and landscaping) will enhance the attractiveness of the neighborhood and encourage the development of other nearby properties in an orderly fashion. The shelter will not interfere with the provision of urban services ( sewer, water, fire protection, etc. ) to the neighborhood and community. The community services and facilities necessary to meet the demands of the shelter program are already present. 3 . Finding: It shall not adversely affect the preservation of property values and the protection of the tax base within the County. Supporting Finding: The approved shelter is required to satisfy a number of operational conditions to assure that the use will neither become detrimental to the value of nearby properties, nor the County tax base. Due to its conspicuous location, the shelter structure is already a local landmark. Exterior improvements will be required to enhance the appearance of the structure, which will benefit the neighborhood as a whole. The mere presence of a full-time round-the-clock supervising staff will help prevent the structure from becoming an attractive nuisance 4. Finding: It shall not adversely affect the policy and goals of the general plan. RESOLUTION No. 89/769 5 Supporting Finding: The approved shelter constitutes an eleemosynary use which is expressly identified as a permitted use in the Retail-Business zoning that has been applied to this site. The Retail-Business zoning conforms with the Retail-Business designation applied to this site in the 1975 Vine Hill/Pacheco General Plan. Based on these considerations, the approved shelter will not adversely affect the policy and goals of the general plan. 5. Finding: It shall not create a nuisance and/or enforcement problem within the neighborhood or community. Supporting Finding: As stated above, the applicant will be required to comply with a number of operational require- ments. In many ways, the shelter program will probably adhere to more restrictive social norms than are observed in many of the surrounding residences and businesses. Clients will only be sent to the shelter after they have passed a screening process to be conducted outside the neighborhood. Clients must maintain sobriety and a drug-free condition while a resident of the program or face mandatory eviction. An advisory board must be established with representation from the neighborhood to regularly review shelter operations and advise the operator on maintaining harmonious relations with the neighborhood. The program will be reviewed after one-year to analyze and address any neighborhood compatibility issues. Based on these considerations, this Board finds that the shelter will neither become a nuisance nor an enforcement problem. 6. Finding: It will not encourage marginal development within the neighborhood. Supporting Finding: The approved shelter will be compatible with existing uses in the neighborhood. Required exterior improvements will help maintain it as one of the more attractive buildings in the neighborhood. Thus, approval of this project will not draw less desirable development to the community. 7. Finding: Special conditions or unique characteristics of the subject property and its location or surroundings are established. Supporting Finding: This site is uniquely suited for the approved shelter in at least three respects. First, the site has an existing church structure on it with a large assembly hall which is suited for conversion to the type of group residential quarters that the operator is able to utilize. The structure also contains a large kitchen suitable for preparing the meals of the residents. Second, the site is conveniently located relative to transit facilities and employment opportunities in the community. Finally, the existing church structure limits the development of other uses on the property. A shelter is one of few uses that could make effective use of this property. In the absence of the shelter, the building might remain unused and become an attractive nuisance to the neighborhood. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the approved project is CONSISTENT with the County' s adopted "Criteria for Homeless Shelter Site Selection" which are attached as Exhibit C; that the approved project satisfies the neighborhood compatibility and acceptance criteria of this policy based on the public review process on this project which has involved numerous individuals, private groups and public agencies; the input from these parties has been used to place appropriate controls and restrictions on the operation to assure that the shelter will be compatible with the RESOLUTION NO. 89/ 769 6 neighborhood; and said Criteria policy is hereby modified (if necessary) to be consistent with this approach. I,hereby certity that this is a true and correct Copy of an action taken and entered on the minutes of the Board of Supervisors on the date shown. ATMSTED. December 5, 1989 PHIL BATCHELOR.Clerk of the Board of Super W=and County Administrator By ..._...Deputy RD/aa BDII/3014-89.RES Attached Exhibits A. County Planning Commission Resolution #47-1989 B. Revised Conditions of Approval per Board of Supervisors Review C. Adopted County Criteria for Homeless Shelter Site Selection Orig. Dept. : Community Development cc: County Counsel Social Service RESOLUTION NO. 89/ 769