HomeMy WebLinkAboutItem 01 Work Session Discussion of a Proposal to Expand the Springfield Homeless Overnight Parking Program AGENDA ITEM SUMMARY Meeting Date: 4/2/2012
Meeting Type:Work Session
Staff Contact/Dept.: Jim Donovan
Staff Phone No: 726-3660
Estimated Time: 20 minutes
S P R I N G F I E L D
C I T Y C O U N C I L
Council Goals: Preserve Hometown
Feel, Livability, and
Environmental Quality
ITEM TITLE: WORK SESSION DISCUSSION OF A PROPOSAL TO EXPAND THE
SPRINGFIELD HOMELESS OVERNIGHT PARKING PROGRAM.
ACTION
REQUESTED:
Discuss a proposal from the Springfield Shelter Rights Alliance (SSRA) homeless
advocacy group to expand the existing overnight parking program and direct staff on
the preparation of an ordinance to codify any changes to the existing standards
contained in the Municipal Code.
ISSUE
STATEMENT:
Staff has reviewed the attached expansion proposal with SSRA and is recommending
Council authorize staff to prepare code amendments adopting portions of the
proposal. Council may agree in part or in whole or disagree with the staff
recommendation. Staff will prepare additional information and an adopting
ordinance for whatever changes the Council deems appropriate.
ATTACHMENTS: Attachment 1: Proposal From Springfield Shelter Rights Alliance
Attachment 2: Staff Report
DISCUSSION/
FINANCIAL
IMPACT:
In July 2009 Council adopted Ordinance 6244 allowing overnight parking for
homeless families in church parking lots under supervision of the St. Vincent DePaul
Overnight Parking Program. SSRA now proposes extending the program to: 1)
permit camping by homeless singles and couples on approved sites, and 2) expand
the list of approved sites to include public institutions, industrial properties and
construction sites in addition to participating church properties.
Staff is recommending preparation and adoption of code amendments allowing
expansion of the existing program to serve homeless singles and couples as requested
and to expand the list of approvable sites to include industrial properties with the
proposed referral system. The attached staff memo outlines the proposal and staff
recommendations.
The existing budget authorization of $7000 per year will be sufficient to cover the
costs of expansion in the first year and fund approximately 25-75 sites total,
depending upon length of stay. There are no new financial impacts at this time.
Future work session discussions will include specific financial impacts based upon
Council direction for the program.
Attachment 1-1
Attachment 1-2
STAFF REPORT SPRINGFIELD PWDSD DEPARTMENT
DATE: March 27, 2012
TO: Springfield City Council
FROM: Gino Grimaldi, City Manager
Jim Donovan, Urban Planning Supervisor
SUBJECT: OVERNIGHT HOMELESS PARKING PROGRAM
INTRODUCTION
This staff report is intended to inform and discuss an amendment to Springfield’s
Overnight Homeless Parking Program proposed by the Springfield Shelter Rights
Alliance with City Council. The format presents the key concepts of the new proposal,
outlines staff’s support for certain aspects of the proposal and provides options for
Council direction on the preparation of more detailed information, public hearing
schedules and an ordinance codifying changes to the program.
BACKGROUND
At its July 20, 2009 Regular Session the City Council adopted Ordinance 6244
allowing overnight parking for homeless families with children in certain church
parking lots under the authority of the City and the supervision of the St. Vincent
DePaul Overnight Parking Program. In July 2010 the sunset clause was removed and
the program was extended until such time as Council directs otherwise. Funding has
remained adequate on relatively light use of the program by homeless families with
children. To date, Springfield’s Homeless Overnight Parking Program has provided
shelter opportunities to Springfield families under the supervision of the St. Vincent
DePaul First Place Family program without complication or incident since its inception.
CURRENT PROPOSAL
The implementation experience indicates that in addition to families with children,
there is an ongoing need to shelter homeless singles and couples. SSRA now proposes
extending the program to serve these additional segments of Springfield’s homeless
population by:
1) Permitting camping by homeless singles and couples through a referral and
monitoring system similar to the current program, and,
2) Extending overnight parking to other sites in addition to participating church
properties.
Attachment 2-1
CONCEPTS OF THE PROPOSAL AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS
Staff acknowledges the additional needs described by SSRA, supports the concept of
expansion and requests Council feedback on specific expansion areas, funding and
timing of the proposed code amendments necessary to codify any expansion supported
by City Council. The following options and recommendations are presented for
Council consideration.
1. Permitting camping by homeless singles and couples through a referral
and monitoring system similar to the current program.
SSRA advises there continues to be a growing number of homeless Springfield singles
and couples as the full impact of the economic depression and mortgage crisis come to
fruition. In order to extend and manage services to this demographic in a manner
similar to the existing family program, SSRA proposes the following features:
• Referral process through other established Springfield service providers to
maintain a reliable connection with Springfield residents.
• Application and permitting procedures through established SVDP procedures.
• Permits are valid for 30 days with the possibility of renewal, 90 days maximum.
• Monitoring of sites and first response by SVDP similar to the family program.
• Providing priority service for military veterans.
Similar features are in place and being successfully implemented by SVDP as part of a
larger program in Eugene. The existing SVDP staff and local service providers can
extend the same services to Springfield residents using the referral form included in
Attachment 1 of this packet. The referral form will be filled out by Springfield service
providers to demonstrate an applicant’s Springfield connection. Due to limited
funding and locations, residents with Springfield ties and military veterans will receive
priority placement in the program.
The costs of providing services to an expanded program remain at approximately
$1000 per year, per site assuming continuous use and including sanitary facilities,
trash pick up and some start up costs.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the program be implemented
with the process and procedures for singles and couples suggested by SSRA. Staff can
prepare more detailed information on the referral, screening, permitting and
monitoring features of the existing program and any changes necessary to serve the
expansion during adoption procedures. The existing budget can be maintained or
increased to cover the expansion of services.
Attachment 2-2
2. Overnight parking on public and industrial properties or construction
sites.
SSRA and SVDP advise that the Eugene program is successfully utilizing a multi-
prong approach utilizing on-street parking and private properties in areas with
industrial zoning and the parking areas of some public institutions. The current
request is for Springfield to consider some, or all of the approach. Each approach has
obvious advantages and disadvantages; staff will prepare additional information and
refine the proposal based upon Council feedback.
The following table highlights discussion/feedback topics related to the various
concepts:
Type of
Parking Site
Pluses+ Minuses- Policy Issues Code
Amendments
Public
Institutions
Additional
Sites,
Proximity to
Services
Limited Size,
Equity,
Liability,
Aesthetics,
Competing
Use
Use of the
“public
square”.
Complicated
Analysis and
Codification
Industrial
Zoned
Properties
Size, Low
Impact to
Neighbors,
Permission,
Relationship,
Security
Education of
Neighbors
Public/Private
Partnerships
Minor
Municipal
Code
Amendments
Construction
Sites (C,I,R)*
Eyes On,
Proximity to
Services,
Size
Duration,
Safety,
Convenience
Residential
Conflicts
Minor
Municipal
Code
Amendments
Public ROW
in Industrial
Districts
Additional
Sites
Remote
Locations,
Liability,
Enforcement
Legal Issues
Complicated
Analysis,
Codification
and
Enforcement
*(Commercial, Industrial, Residential)
The above table visually indicates the relative advantages and disadvantages of the
possible expansion areas. On balance, the advantages of private industrial properties
and construction sites exceed potential disadvantages and can be accomplished with
minor municipal code amendments. The “disadvantages” of using public rights of
way or public institutions are not insurmountable, but rather involve considerable
more time and research to prepare a discussion of policy and legal ramifications.
Attachment 2-3
4
Staff ranks private industrial areas as the most logical expansion area because the
practical advantages for the property owners and clients, coupled with the current
program’s successful public education, recruitment and implementation record
provide the simplest and most direct path to adoption and successful implementation.
Additional program details, a relatively simple municipal code amendment and
implementation schedule can be brought forward by staff for a combined work session
review and adoption procedures at Council’s earliest convenience.
Construction sites rank second, and can be included for Council consideration with
additional information including, but not limited to size constraints, limited duration
and constant change of location, proximity to residential and commercial districts,
client safety and convenience and the advantages and disadvantages of a passive
“night watchman” presence. Adding additional detail to the discussion and ordinance
preparation will add additional time to the work session and adoption process for
potentially limited benefit considering the impacts of the issues cited above.
Staff Recommendation and Requested Action
Staff recommends expansion of the existing program to include private industrial
properties at this time. Adding industrial sites to the existing list of participating
churches will provide additional opportunities to serve a wider demographic of
Springfield’s homeless population. The existing budget authorization of $7000 per
year will be sufficient to cover the costs of expansion and fund approximately 25-75
sites total depending upon length of stay. At Council’s direction, staff will prepare
additional information and an implementation ordinance for adoption.
Attachment 2-4