Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout09 - PH-1 - Special Use Permit SL-16-0014 - 10/15/20191 CITY COUNCIL AGENDA REPORT MEETING DATE: OCTOBER 15, 2019 ITEM NUMBER: PH-1 SUBJECT: SPECIAL USE PERMIT SL-16-0014 TO OPERATE A SOBER LIVING HOME (THE FELLOWSHIP HOUSE), SERVING TEN PERSONS AND ONE HOUSE MANAGER, AT 2412 ORANGE AVENUE DATE: OCTOBER 9, 2019 FROM: DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT/PLANNING DIVISION PRESENTATION BY: WILLA BOUWENS-KILLEEN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: WILLA BOUWENS-KILLEEN, AICP 714.754.5153 ZONING ADMINISTRATOR RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution upholding the decision of the Planning Commission to uphold the Director’s denial and deny Special Use Permit SL-16- 0014. APPLICANT OR AUTHORIZED AGENT: The applicant is Mark Giddings. BACKGROUND: This property has been operating as a sober living home, called the Fellowship House, since at least early 2015. The property is zoned R1 (Single-Family Residential) and contains a five-bedroom house. The facility serves ten residents plus one resident manager for a total of 11 residents. Pursuant to Costa Mesa Municipal Code Section 13- 311, group homes serving seven or more are prohibited in the R1 zone. Director’s Denial of the Special Use Permit Application On December 9, 2016, the applicant submitted an application for a Special Use Permit (SUP) (concurrently with a request for Reasonable Accommodation, described below) seeking to allow a sober living home in the single-family residence at the subject property housing 10 residents and one resident manager. 2 At the time the application was submitted, there were State-licensed treatment facilities operating within 650 feet of the subject site:  2379 Orange contained two units, each unit with its own State license to operate a drug and alcohol treatment facility. This facility has since closed; and  2417 Orange Avenue, a State-licensed drug and alcohol treatment facility housing 22 residents. As described below, the request for a Reasonable Accommodation was denied by the Director of Development Services on April 21, 2017 because sufficient justification was not provided to support allowing for 10 residents. The SUP was denied on January 26, 2018, pursuant to the CMMC requirements for group homes with six or fewer beds, including the fact that other state-licensed facilities were operating within 650 feet of the subject property thereby creating a separation conflict under the CMMC (Attachment 3). On February 2, 2018, the applicant appealed the Director’s denial of the SUP, to the Planning Commission. The applicant’s appeal can be found in Attachment 4. Director’s Denial of the Reasonable Accommodation Request The applicant submitted a request for Reasonable Accommodation on December 9, 2016, as part of his application for the SUP (Attachment 2). The request was to allow 10 residents in the subject sober living home. Further information was submitted on February 21, 2017 (Attachment 2). The Director was unable to make the necessary findings for approval and on April 21, 2017, the Director denied the request for Reasonable Accommodation (Attachment 5). The Applicant did not appeal this decision. Therefore, the decision is final. The applicant was advised at the time of the denial of the request for Reasonable Accommodation that the Zoning Code limits group homes in the R1 zone to no more than six residents. Planning Commission Action Upholding the Director’s Denial of the SUP On July 8, 2019, the Planning Commission voted unanimously to deny SUP SL-16-0014. The application is fully described and analyzed in the staff report prepared for the Planning Commission meeting of July 8, 2019 (Attachment 7). The Resolution adopted by the Planning Commission is attached to this report (PC Resolution PA-19-35, Attachment 8). Eight members of the public spoke regarding this item at the Planning Commission meeting. Written public comments received on this item for the Planning Commission meeting are included in Attachment 11. The Planning Commission staff report and video may also be found on the City’s website via the following links: Staff report: http://ftp.costamesaca.gov/costamesaca/planningcommission/agenda/2019/2019-07- 08/PH-1.pdf 3 Video: http://costamesa.granicus.com/MediaPlayer.php?view_id=10&clip_id=3422 The applicant’s appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision was filed with the City Clerk on July 15, 2019, and is included in Attachment 9. The applicant’s appeal form stated “We need time to review and be advised by legal counsel.” DESCRIPTION/ANALYSIS: The subject property is located on Orange Avenue between Santa Isabel Avenue and Monte Vista Avenue. The property is zoned R1 (Single-Family Residential) and has a General Plan Land Use Designation of Low Density Residential. Single-family residential uses that are also zoned R1 abut the site to the north, south, and east; residential development with R2-MD (Multi-Family Residential – Medium Density) zoning exists to the east across Orange Avenue. Facility Description The subject site contains a two-story, single-family residence on a 6,600-square-foot lot. A two-car garage is accessed from Orange Avenue from a curved driveway which provides two open parking spaces. The single-family residence was constructed in 1962 and expanded in 1986. The house contains five bedrooms. The sober living home at this location has been in operation since at least 2015, based on the opening of cases by the City’s Community Improvement Division. The facility is a non-State-licensed sober living home serving a total of 10 residents (plus one manager) in a single-family residence. A sober living home is a sub-type of group home. CMMC Section 13-6 (Definitions) defines a group home as follows: “A facility that is being used as a supportive living environment for persons who are considered handicapped under state or federal law. A group home operated by a single operator or service provider (whether licensed or unlicensed) constitutes a single facility whether the facility occupies one or more dwelling units.” “Sober living homes means a group home for persons who are recovering from a drug and/or alcohol addiction and who are considered handicapped under state or federal law. Sober living homes shall not include the following: (1) residential care facilities; (2) any sober living home that operates as a single housekeeping unit.” The applicant has provided no detailed description of the subject property or its layout. The property was conforming with Code requirements in 1986 when building permits were obtained for an addition to the existing single-family residence. 4 Separation Map The CMMC requires a separation of 650 feet between sober living and/or State-licensed drug and alcohol treatment facilities. The following types of facilities are depicted on the map:  State-licensed treatment facilities serving six or fewer adults, as these facilities are permitted by right under State law.  Sober living and State-licensed treatment facilities for which the City has issued a CUP to serve more than six adults.  Sober living facilities serving up to six adults for which the City has issued a Special Use Permit (SUP).  State-licensed facilities or sober living facilities which require but have not obtained a CUP or SUP and are operating in violation of City zoning regulations. The attached separation map indicates that there is one facility located within 650 feet of the subject property; the facility at 2417 Orange Avenue is operating without the required permits and is now the subject of a state court nuisance abatement action. (Refer to Attachment 1, Separation Map, and to Table 1 below for additional details). TABLE 1- SEPARATION MAP SUMMARY Location Status 2417 Orange Avenue State-licensed treatment facility serving 22 residents in violation of the CMMC; Applications for a CUP and Reasonable Accommodation were denied by the City Council in January 2018 but the use continues; Active civil nuisance abatement action. When the SUP was originally denied, there had also been a State-licensed drug and alcohol treatment facility serving a total of 12 residents at 2379 Orange Avenue (six in unit A and six in units B and C operating under two separate State licenses). However, in March 2018, Code Enforcement confirmed that the operation had ceased and State records no longer show the property as having a State license. Calls for Service In the past four years, Code Enforcement has not received any complaints related to the facility. The Police Department reports that, from January 1, 2015 to October 7, 2019, there have been a total of 10 calls for service attributable to the property. These calls for service relate primarily to theft and disturbances, with three calls for medical aid. Staff will present updated calls for service at the time of the hearing if there are any changes to the information included in this report. 5 Ownership The City Council adopted Ordinance Nos. 17-05 and 17-06 in May of 2017. These ordinances changed the submittal requirements for applications for sober living homes. Pursuant to CMMC Section 13-311(a)(ii) and (iii) applicants are now required to provide the following information: If the applicant and/or operator is a partnership, corporation, firm, or association, then the applicant/operator shall provide the additional names and addresses as follows and such persons shall also sign the application: a. every general partner of the partnership; b. every owner with a controlling interest in the corporation; c. the person designated by the officers of a corporation as set forth in a resolution of the corporation that is to be designated as the permit holder; The license and permit history of the applicant(s), including whether such applicant(s), in previously operating a similar use in this or another city, county or state under license and/or permit, has had such license and/or permit revoked or suspended, and the reason therefore. Mr. Mark Giddings has confirmed that he is the owner and sole member of Fellowship House. Compliance with CMMC 13-311 A written statement of intention to comply with CMMC 13-311 is required to be indicated in the SUP application, as well as in a separate written confirmation. The applicant signed the intent to comply as part of the original SUP application. However, the application form submitted by the applicant predates changes included in Ordinance 17-05 which modified some of the requirements under CMMC 13-311. Therefore, in preparation for the Planning Commission hearing, City staff requested that the applicant submit written confirmation that they will comply with all the requirements of CMMC 13-311 as modified (refer to Attachment 6, City letter dated May 23, 2019) but the applicant’s confirmation was not submitted. The Code requirements include but are not limited to the following:  The group home is required to have a house manager who resides at the group home or any multiple persons acting as a house manager who are present at the group home on a twenty-four-hour basis and who are responsible for the day-to- day operation of the group home.  Occupants must not require and operators must not provide “care and supervision” as those terms are defined by Health and Safety Code 1503.5 and Section 80001(c)(3) of title 22, California Code of Regulations.  The sober living home shall not provide any of the following services as they are defined by Section 10501(a)(6) of Title 9, California Code of Regulations: Detoxification; educational counseling; individual or group counseling sessions; and treatment or recovery planning. 6  Upon eviction from or involuntary termination of residency in a group home, the operator of the group home shall make available to the occupant transportation to the address listed on the occupant’s driver license, state issued identification card, or the permanent address identified in the occupant’s application or referral to the group home. An approved SUP may be subject to revocation if the operator does not maintain compliance with the requirements of CMMC 13-311. Overcrowding Pursuant to Section 13-311(a)(2) of the CMMC, a group home that may otherwise be considered an unpermitted use may locate in a R1 zone with a SUP provided that: The group home has six or fewer occupants, not counting a house manager, but in no event shall have more than seven occupants. If the dwelling unit has a secondary accessory unit, occupants of both units will be combined to determine whether or not the limit of six occupants has been exceeded. The City’s Land Use Matrix prohibits group homes serving seven or more residents in the R1 zone, underCMMC Section 13-30, Table 13-30, Numbers 6 through 9.1. Assuming five bedrooms, a living room and dining room, the occupancy per room would be 1.4 persons per room; consequently, the occupancy of the residence constitutes overcrowding pursuant to the Housing Element of the Costa Mesa General Plan, page HOU-23, which states: Overcrowding is defined as a housing unit occupied by more than one person per room. A severely overcrowded housing unit is one with more than 1.5 persons per room. A room is defined as a bedroom, living room, dining room, or finished recreation room, but excludes a kitchen or bathroom. This definition is consistent with HUD’s federal standards, which generally define “overcrowding” to mean housing units with 1.01 or more persons per room. See 42 USCS § 5302(a)(10). Under this standard, the residence is considered overcrowded. JUSTIFICATION FOR DENIAL: Per CMMC Section 13-311, group homes serving seven or more persons in the R1 zone are prohibited. The requested Reasonable Accommodation to allow more than six residents was denied. The applicant did not appeal the Director’s decision regarding Reasonable Accommodation, so the decision thereon is final and is not subject to review. Therefore, the proposed use is prohibited by the CMMC. 7 ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: The project is categorically exempt form the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301, Existing Facilities. If the project is denied, CEQA does not apply pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(b)(5) and CEQA Guidelines Section 15270(a). ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED: Because group homes serving seven or more persons in the R1 zone are prohibited, and the denial of the requested Reasonable Accommodation to deviate from the six or fewer requirement was not appealed and is therefore not before the City Council, there are no alternatives to approve the applicant’s request under the CMMC. A draft Resolution denying the appeal of the SUP has been provided as Attachment 10. Should the City Council believe that findings exist to approve the SUP application, this hearing should be continued to allow staff to prepare the appropriate Resolution for consideration at a subsequent meeting. FISCAL REVIEW: The adoption of this Resolution will not have any fiscal impact on the City’s budget. LEGAL REVIEW: The report and draft Resolution has been reviewed and approved as to form by the City Attorney’s Office. PUBLIC NOTICE: Pursuant to Title 13, Section 13-29(d), of the CMMC, three types of public notification have been completed no less than 10 days prior to the date of the public hearing: 1. Mailed notice. A public notice was mailed to all property owners and occupants within a 500-foot radius of the project site. The required notice radius is measured from the external boundaries of the property. On-site posting. A public notice was posted on each street frontage of the project site. 2. Newspaper publication. A public notice was published once in the Daily Pilot newspaper. As of the publication of this report, staff has received one comment regarding the Special Use Permit application. In addition, four communications from three residents (one of which contained a petition from 16 residents) were received in response to the Notice for the Planning Commission meeting. All correspondence requested that the Planning Commission deny the request. All written public comments are included in Attachment 11. 8 Any correspondence received after the publication of the staff report will be forwarded to the City Council separately. CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES: This item is administrative in nature. CONCLUSION: The applicant has appealed the Planning Commission’s upholding of the Director of Economic and Development Services’ denial of the SUP application to operate a sober living home with ten residents in the R1 zone. The request for Reasonable Accommodation to allow ten residents was denied and not appealed. A sober living home serving seven or more persons is a prohibited use in the R1 zone. Consequently, staff recommends the City Council deny the Special Use Permit. WILLA BOUWENS-KILLEEN, AICP BARRY CURTIS, AICP Zoning Administrator Director of Economic & Development Services KELLY A. TELFORD, CPA KIMBERLY HALL BARLOW Director of Finance City Attorney ATTACHMENTS: 1. Separation Map 2. Reasonable Accommodation request dated December 9, 2016/Additional information from applicant dated March 21, 2017 3. Letter from the Director dated January 26, 2018 denying special use permit application 4. Appeal of Director’s denial of the Special Use Permit dated February 2, 2018 5. Letter from Director dated April 21, 2017 denying the Reasonable Accommodation request 6. Letter from City staff to the applicant dated May 23, 2019 7. Staff report prepared for the Planning Commission meeting of July 8, 2019 8. Planning Commission Resolution PC-19-35 denying SUP SL-16- 0014 9. Applicant’s Appeal of the Planning Commission’s decision dated 9 July 15, 2019 10. City Council Resolution Upholding the Decision of the Planning Commission to deny the SUP SL-16-0014 11. Written Public Comments 10