I question the County's ability to operate or find a qualified operator in the two years that the Grant will support operations at the proposed homeless shelter. Much as we may find with Measure B, we can afford the building but might not be able to afford the operations of the building. I believe we can look to the cost of renting a hotel room for guidance as to the cost of running a hotel for the benefit of the homeless . . . probably around $2,000,000/year.
This project should not move forward in the proposed location until all key community stakeholders have been able to fully discuss their concerns and an economic assessment/evaluation for the long-term effects of the proposed project has been provided to the community.
To effectively help homeless or transitioning populations, shelters and different housing options should be distributed throughout a community. The planned project location scores lower than the median US neighborhood (AARP Livability Index) for available “Transportaion” and “Economic Opportunities”, indicating that an increase in the homeless/transitioning population in this area may geographically isolate that population from the necessary health and support services offered in other areas of the community. It’s been shown through multiple studies that “there is growing evidence that walkability is a key way to stimulate economic development and attract young people to a place.” (APA Planning Magazine, Dec. 2019). Without a long-term plan for stimulating economic growth in the area, other commercial entities may struggle to maintain or expand their business.
The Ukiah Valley General Plan Community Design Element describes Gobbi Street as one of six main “Gateways” to the City and says “The City gateways are less of a panorama, in that one sees a more narrow scope of view – the streetscape and immediately-visible buildings or lots.” The proposed project area includes sign frontage viewable from Highway 101 and could potentially have negative economic impacts to portions of the Gobbi Street Gateway.
The City of Ukiah has a limited number of properties that are in the C-1 commercial zoning district. The areas in Ukiah that are part of the “Homeless Shelter Overlay District” do not require Use Permitting, whereas a property zoned C-1 would require a Use Permit for a “Large Homeless Facility”. By using a property for residential purposes when it is zoned for commercial use, there may be a long-term loss of commercial property tax/receipt revenue from that location, reduction in job growth, and loss of lodging for Mendocino’s growing tourism industry. If the lodging industry is reduced in Ukiah, the same issues described in the Ukiah Valley General Plan Economic Development Element may become prevalent again: “The tourism market has not effectively exploited the concept of "stay and play an extra day" in the Ukiah Valley.”
Concerns:
1. City of Ukiah has limited properties in the C-1 zoning district; loss of C-1 zoning district may disrupt economic growth in the area (including Planned Development Zones).
2. Proposed use of hotel will require a Use Permit, not fully utilizing areas already designated in the “Homeless Shelter Overlay District” or creating new areas for the Overlay District.
3. Proposed location has limited “walkability” or transportation options for planned population increase.
4. Lack of economic assessment for project or comparison of other locations that may be more suitable (proximity to services, increased walkability, increased grant funding) and would more effectively disperse services in the community.
5. Gobbi Street is 1 of Ukiah’s 6 “Gateways” (General Plan) – Planned project location may have long-term economic impacts on the “Gobbi St Gateway” (undermining General Plan Community Design Element).
6. Loss of lodging, potentially damaging to Ukiah’s tourism industry.
7. Lack of community input, by key stakeholders, may undermine the timeline goals set forth in the Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County (adopted April 27, 2020, pg 26)
References in relation to Concerns above:
1. City of Ukiah zoning map (ArcGIS): https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=17bf07206a01467f86e3a3a910391bb4
2. Ukiah City Code, Division 9, Chapter 2, §9082 PERMITTED USES.
a. City of Ukiah 2019-2027 Housing Element, pg 22-23.
3. AARP Livability Index (555 S Orchard Ave)Transportation Category: https://livabilityindex.aarp.org/search#555+S+Orchard+Ave+Ukiah+CA+95482+USA
4. Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County
5. City of Ukiah General Plan,Coummunity Design Element,2.03 The “Gateways”, 2.03.01 Summary of major findings (pg 6)
6.
a. City of Ukiah General Plan, Economic Development Element, 3.02 The Community’s needs: Continued economic growth, 3.02.01 Summary of major findings (pg 5).
b. Mendocino County 2018-2019 Economic Assessment, Tourism (pg 20).
c. City of Ukiah General Plan – 16. Economic Development Element, 3.02 The Community's needs: Continued economic growth, 3.02.01 Summary of major findings
7. Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County (adopted April 27, 2020, pg 26)
To the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors,
I am strongly opposed to a new homeless shelter located at 555 S Orchard Avenue, Ukiah. As an employee of Selzer Realty & Associates, I feel the addition of the homeless is a safety concern. Selzer Realty is the largest real estate employer in the area and have a lot of women working all hours of the day and evenings. I arrive in the office prior to most employees and work after hours quite often. I fear for my safety and those that I work with. With the location of other homeless shelters on Gobbi Street, businesses have been pushed to hire security guards. There are private residences, daycare centers, a school and a church in the area as well. A large amount of the homeless are not from this county, yet we continue to support them. Who will be there to protect us? Please reconsider the location of this homeless shelter.
I strongly urge you to reconsider Best Western at 555 South orchard Avenue as the proposed property site for a new homeless shelter. This specific location 555 South Orchard Avenue is a huge threat to local businesses and the community who support them. A homeless shelter should be located in an area where in which it can better serve its public; a location that provides an area where adequate security and where distance can assure those who surround and neighbor won’t suffer unreasonable negative impacts. This facility should not be located and share common spaces such as driveways with its neighboring businesses, nor should it be located within 300 yards of a daycare and elementary school. It is vital that all community voices are heard and considered in this decision, not just that of the homeless. I think we can all agree that the transients in this community not only bring drugs and violence, but also vandalism and trash including drug paraphernalia and needles. The amount of homelessness we have in this community are not locals, they are not from here. We continue to feed, support and now shelter; they will continue to seek help here and travel here from every community but our own. They are a serious concern for the communities physical safety and the safety of our children. They will continue to detract those who travel our beautiful county which will continue to add to loss in county revenue, hotel tax and the success of our local businesses. 555 South Orchard is NOT an ideal location for this shelter, please reconsider.
There are so many reasons why I oppose this purchase! I'd like to start with the amount of homeless people who are actually from our area. I could be wrong but I thought I learned that only 40% of our homeless population are actually from here, which means the rest are transplants. Do you know why? Like the saying goes "if you build it, they will come", that's what comes to my mind first. The more we give handouts, the more we will bring in to take these handouts, making it harder to take care of the people we already have here. Also, didn't we just build a place on Gobbi St. for the homeless? How can we possibly need more rooms/beds? As a local agent the price to me seems outrageous, and let's also talk about the location. We have a limited number of properties zoned C-1, taking one away to turn into a residential property can harm economic growth, you will be taking away lodging which will potentially have a negative impact on our local tourism, not to mention it's next to a real estate office which could prevent people from wanting to move to the area if the first thing they see when they get here are a bunch of homeless hanging around outside the building. There has been no economic assessment done for this project and no community input. Please take the steps for this project that you would make any member of the community do, and please, if you feel it is so important to create more 'homes' for the homeless, at the very least I ask you to reconsider the location and find somewhere else that isn't next to existing businesses, school's, and churches.
To whom it may concern:
I am opposed to this location. Our office backs up to this building and we already have problems with homeless sitting around here and looking in our cars. I do not feel safe coming to work if this building is established for a homeless shelter. I think that a more suitable location would be somewhere where there are not established businesses, let alone in the middle of town. For the amount of money you are purchasing this for, seems more logical to build somewhere like Brush street where the community isn't in fear.
Another problem with using this location as the homeless shelter is that we have clients come in to our office, and clients from out of the area...If they come here seeing what is going on in our parking lot and around our business, why would they want to move to Ukiah. I think this location is affecting growth to our community.
I question the County's ability to operate or find a qualified operator in the two years that the Grant will support operations at the proposed homeless shelter. Much as we may find with Measure B, we can afford the building but might not be able to afford the operations of the building. I believe we can look to the cost of renting a hotel room for guidance as to the cost of running a hotel for the benefit of the homeless . . . probably around $2,000,000/year.
This project should not move forward in the proposed location until all key community stakeholders have been able to fully discuss their concerns and an economic assessment/evaluation for the long-term effects of the proposed project has been provided to the community.
To effectively help homeless or transitioning populations, shelters and different housing options should be distributed throughout a community. The planned project location scores lower than the median US neighborhood (AARP Livability Index) for available “Transportaion” and “Economic Opportunities”, indicating that an increase in the homeless/transitioning population in this area may geographically isolate that population from the necessary health and support services offered in other areas of the community. It’s been shown through multiple studies that “there is growing evidence that walkability is a key way to stimulate economic development and attract young people to a place.” (APA Planning Magazine, Dec. 2019). Without a long-term plan for stimulating economic growth in the area, other commercial entities may struggle to maintain or expand their business.
The Ukiah Valley General Plan Community Design Element describes Gobbi Street as one of six main “Gateways” to the City and says “The City gateways are less of a panorama, in that one sees a more narrow scope of view – the streetscape and immediately-visible buildings or lots.” The proposed project area includes sign frontage viewable from Highway 101 and could potentially have negative economic impacts to portions of the Gobbi Street Gateway.
The City of Ukiah has a limited number of properties that are in the C-1 commercial zoning district. The areas in Ukiah that are part of the “Homeless Shelter Overlay District” do not require Use Permitting, whereas a property zoned C-1 would require a Use Permit for a “Large Homeless Facility”. By using a property for residential purposes when it is zoned for commercial use, there may be a long-term loss of commercial property tax/receipt revenue from that location, reduction in job growth, and loss of lodging for Mendocino’s growing tourism industry. If the lodging industry is reduced in Ukiah, the same issues described in the Ukiah Valley General Plan Economic Development Element may become prevalent again: “The tourism market has not effectively exploited the concept of "stay and play an extra day" in the Ukiah Valley.”
Concerns:
1. City of Ukiah has limited properties in the C-1 zoning district; loss of C-1 zoning district may disrupt economic growth in the area (including Planned Development Zones).
2. Proposed use of hotel will require a Use Permit, not fully utilizing areas already designated in the “Homeless Shelter Overlay District” or creating new areas for the Overlay District.
3. Proposed location has limited “walkability” or transportation options for planned population increase.
4. Lack of economic assessment for project or comparison of other locations that may be more suitable (proximity to services, increased walkability, increased grant funding) and would more effectively disperse services in the community.
5. Gobbi Street is 1 of Ukiah’s 6 “Gateways” (General Plan) – Planned project location may have long-term economic impacts on the “Gobbi St Gateway” (undermining General Plan Community Design Element).
6. Loss of lodging, potentially damaging to Ukiah’s tourism industry.
7. Lack of community input, by key stakeholders, may undermine the timeline goals set forth in the Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County (adopted April 27, 2020, pg 26)
References in relation to Concerns above:
1. City of Ukiah zoning map (ArcGIS): https://www.arcgis.com/home/item.html?id=17bf07206a01467f86e3a3a910391bb4
2. Ukiah City Code, Division 9, Chapter 2, §9082 PERMITTED USES.
a. City of Ukiah 2019-2027 Housing Element, pg 22-23.
3. AARP Livability Index (555 S Orchard Ave)Transportation Category: https://livabilityindex.aarp.org/search#555+S+Orchard+Ave+Ukiah+CA+95482+USA
4. Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County
5. City of Ukiah General Plan,Coummunity Design Element,2.03 The “Gateways”, 2.03.01 Summary of major findings (pg 6)
6.
a. City of Ukiah General Plan, Economic Development Element, 3.02 The Community’s needs: Continued economic growth, 3.02.01 Summary of major findings (pg 5).
b. Mendocino County 2018-2019 Economic Assessment, Tourism (pg 20).
c. City of Ukiah General Plan – 16. Economic Development Element, 3.02 The Community's needs: Continued economic growth, 3.02.01 Summary of major findings
7. Strategic Plan to Address Homelessness in Mendocino County (adopted April 27, 2020, pg 26)
Leiloni Shine
Realtor®
Selzer Realty & Associates
RE/MAX GOLD
DRE Lic. #02094026
(707) 462-4000 Office
(707) 671-6928 Cell
To the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors,
I am strongly opposed to a new homeless shelter located at 555 S Orchard Avenue, Ukiah. As an employee of Selzer Realty & Associates, I feel the addition of the homeless is a safety concern. Selzer Realty is the largest real estate employer in the area and have a lot of women working all hours of the day and evenings. I arrive in the office prior to most employees and work after hours quite often. I fear for my safety and those that I work with. With the location of other homeless shelters on Gobbi Street, businesses have been pushed to hire security guards. There are private residences, daycare centers, a school and a church in the area as well. A large amount of the homeless are not from this county, yet we continue to support them. Who will be there to protect us? Please reconsider the location of this homeless shelter.
Board fo Supervisors,
I strongly urge you to reconsider Best Western at 555 South orchard Avenue as the proposed property site for a new homeless shelter. This specific location 555 South Orchard Avenue is a huge threat to local businesses and the community who support them. A homeless shelter should be located in an area where in which it can better serve its public; a location that provides an area where adequate security and where distance can assure those who surround and neighbor won’t suffer unreasonable negative impacts. This facility should not be located and share common spaces such as driveways with its neighboring businesses, nor should it be located within 300 yards of a daycare and elementary school. It is vital that all community voices are heard and considered in this decision, not just that of the homeless. I think we can all agree that the transients in this community not only bring drugs and violence, but also vandalism and trash including drug paraphernalia and needles. The amount of homelessness we have in this community are not locals, they are not from here. We continue to feed, support and now shelter; they will continue to seek help here and travel here from every community but our own. They are a serious concern for the communities physical safety and the safety of our children. They will continue to detract those who travel our beautiful county which will continue to add to loss in county revenue, hotel tax and the success of our local businesses. 555 South Orchard is NOT an ideal location for this shelter, please reconsider.
Kimberlie Brazil
Dear Board of Supervisors,
There are so many reasons why I oppose this purchase! I'd like to start with the amount of homeless people who are actually from our area. I could be wrong but I thought I learned that only 40% of our homeless population are actually from here, which means the rest are transplants. Do you know why? Like the saying goes "if you build it, they will come", that's what comes to my mind first. The more we give handouts, the more we will bring in to take these handouts, making it harder to take care of the people we already have here. Also, didn't we just build a place on Gobbi St. for the homeless? How can we possibly need more rooms/beds? As a local agent the price to me seems outrageous, and let's also talk about the location. We have a limited number of properties zoned C-1, taking one away to turn into a residential property can harm economic growth, you will be taking away lodging which will potentially have a negative impact on our local tourism, not to mention it's next to a real estate office which could prevent people from wanting to move to the area if the first thing they see when they get here are a bunch of homeless hanging around outside the building. There has been no economic assessment done for this project and no community input. Please take the steps for this project that you would make any member of the community do, and please, if you feel it is so important to create more 'homes' for the homeless, at the very least I ask you to reconsider the location and find somewhere else that isn't next to existing businesses, school's, and churches.
To whom it may concern:
I am opposed to this location. Our office backs up to this building and we already have problems with homeless sitting around here and looking in our cars. I do not feel safe coming to work if this building is established for a homeless shelter. I think that a more suitable location would be somewhere where there are not established businesses, let alone in the middle of town. For the amount of money you are purchasing this for, seems more logical to build somewhere like Brush street where the community isn't in fear.
Another problem with using this location as the homeless shelter is that we have clients come in to our office, and clients from out of the area...If they come here seeing what is going on in our parking lot and around our business, why would they want to move to Ukiah. I think this location is affecting growth to our community.
Thank you for listening,
Alex McMillen