It has emerged as a new issue of controversy – the concept of a respite center to provide day services and potentially temporary overnight shelter for those individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness in Davis.
The respite center as proposed would be comprised of two key components: (1) A day shelter consisting of modular units where individuals could spend the day and have access to bathrooms, showers, and laundry facilities; and (2) An overnight shelter consisting of sleeping cabins where individuals could spend the night.
On July 30, 2019, in preliminary findings presented in a feasibility report potentially suitable city-owned locations included: 1813 Fifth Street, 3559 Second Street, 24998 County Road 102, 1425 Wake Forest Drive, and 504 Fifth Street.
Council did not allocate any funding toward the pilot program, but they directed staff to take the next steps to explore siting the center on a city-owned parcel located at 3559 Second Street.
Staff reached out to businesses directly adjacent to the location.
Those businesses had a number of concerns. One of them was bicyclist and pedestrian safety in the vicinity, as the “David Pelz overcrossing serves as the primary active transportation connection between east and south Davis” and the location is on a safe route to school that many children use.
There were also concerns about employee safety and security while as work, “Particularly concerned about the lobby areas since some building doors remain unlocked during business hours and do not 
have onsite security to monitor the lobby areas and parking lot” and “concerned about safety for employees who work at night.”
Among the other concerns: theft and vandalism, loitering, visual blight. They were concerned that “the pilot could become a permanent program.”
Staff also received “significant input from residents, primarily from the Mace Ranch neighborhood.” Staff writes, “The majority of residents reiterated the concerns already identified by the businesses with a particular emphasis on the safety of schoolchildren who regularly traverse the Dave Pelz overcrossing. Others opposed siting a homeless center anywhere within City limits. A minority voiced support.”
Staff notes that they did not conduct a formal neighborhood outreach, but would do so after “evaluating the business concerns and determining whether the City could adequately mitigate those concerns.”
Staff writes, “It is unlikely any mitigation measures would change the view of those who oppose this location.”
The respite center idea was proposed by Mayor Brett Lee, who explained at a Chamber event that a big problem is, because the homeless cannot simply go and hang out in neighborhoods or residential areas all day, they go to the downtown where they can blend in a bit better.
However, they proposed a new idea about where the homeless can go, so that they are not in the downtown all day.
He said, “(A) respite center where people can go, where it’s planned that they go there.
“There isn’t sort of one solution,” he said. “This is a piece.”
Given the community pushback at the Second Street site, the council could look at another location. However, staff said that they anticipate “opposition to any location selected.”
Council’s direction was for the city to look at both a day center and overnight center simultaneously.
However, staff said, “Once staff began research into both aspects of the pilot, it became clear that implementing an overnight center would take additional time. Staff has therefore proceeded with the goal of bringing forward the day respite center first and then concentrate on the details necessary to implement an overnight respite center.”
Given negative feedback on the initial site, staff is returning to council with additional feedback for alternative locations.
Some of the alternatives include: Exploring a combination of day and overnight respite center at either 512 Fifth St or 1717 Fifth Street, both city owned properties. Suggest another city-owned or privately owned location. Or shift efforts to increasing support to existing community based programs that support and address issues of homelessness.
—David M. Greenwald reporting
“Given negative feedback on the initial site, staff is returning to council with additional feedback for alternative locations.” Yeah. Good luck with that.
Yes, good luck indeed. These types of projects are never easy to site.
It should be noted though that by proceeding with the early selection of just one site and eliminating the others from contention early on—with inadequate documentation as to why—the City set itself up for failure in its process The full range of siting possibilities should be analyzed in-depth for pros & cons.
This is happening in cities and towns all along the west coast. Same arguments on both sides. Same groups taking the same stands.
Perhaps an analysis of similar situations where respite/overnight centers were not opposed by the neighbors and succeed in what they were trying to accomplish, in a small college setting without immediately adjacent cities. Not that I have any examples of that . . . but maybe there are some?
I’m not opposed to a respite center as such, and I am vehemently opposed to wet shelters. There is the concern of actually creating a place that draws more of the . . . I’m not allowed to use descriptors due to the language-muting policies of the blog, but I refuse to use the term ‘homeless’ as it doesn’t describe accurately and has political meaning-bending connotations . . . so maybe I’ll use the symbol “¥” . . . ¥ to Davis, and the balance with giving services to those who have no place to go.
But as well, annoying-out-of-tune violin man won’t go there, because downtown is a source of income, as is the . . . oh that language thing again . . . ∫ portion of the ¥ that relies on downtown income. They will stay in downtown.
And really, downtown is a bit more exciting than hanging out under a pedestrian bridge all day. So, if the ¥ are not banned, will they be lured under Pelz? By what? Because Davis don’t want you downtown? That’s why. And you’ll like it.
Craig… Alan is somewhat correct… “wet shelter” is an immediate intervention… but, if they are not willing to being weaned from their “wetness”… well, no progress…
I’m no medical/social services authority, but have had some experience working with homeless folk who have had substance abuse issues … on a one to one basis, following “my gut”… not housing someone who is “wet” @ time of ‘entry’, means pretty much no chance of behavioral change… but once being assisted, there is a need for a ‘social contract’… continued support, in exchange for change in behavior… “cold turkey” might not work… but a commitment, evidenced by behavior, to seriously trend towards cessation, is reasonable… and necessary for the possibility of long term good outcomes… in my experience, you can get into the situation where you think you’re at the one yard line, about to get to the goal, and then the QB back-slides, giving back a lot of the ‘yardage gained’…
Bottom line… the homeless folk are the QB… they have “the ball”… the best we can do is run defense of the QB (so they don’t get ‘sacked’), and provide offense openings for the QB to score/succeed.
And, regretfully, there are some that are not committed/can’t get to being committed to help themselves… and, as much as we might try, there is nothing anyone can do to change their situation… but, I believe we must try… ultimately, it’s up to them in regards to “wetness”…
I sometimes ¥ -der Y some post as they do, at times… I ¥ for folk looking for ¥ way to work towards commonly supported solutions to issues… but that is ¥ , a single, opinion… I may be ¥-rng to hope for that…
hey, I have an idea . . . let’s put it downtwon.
But, not invoking the 5 comment ‘guideline’?
Just curious…
It changes.
Now that we’ve got our five districts picked out, every candidate for City Council should be required to propose one place in each district for homeless sheltering. That should make them all unelectable.
ROFL.
This is the greatest comment EMITDVBSWWNACM!
(Ever Made In The Davis Vanguard By Someone Who Wasn’t Named Alan C. Miller)