Victorville planning commission approves transitional-aged youth shelter and drop-in center without 24-hour security requirement

The Victorville City Planning Commission voted unanimously on Feb. 12 to approve a second modification to conditional use permit ADMN24-00154, allowing a transitional-aged youth (TAY) drop-in center and a 30-bed emergency shelter to operate as co-tenants at 14049 Amargosa Road under the terms of a submitted security plan that does not require a 24-hour licensed security guard.

Planning staff presented two approval options: Option A would approve the project based on the security plan provided by the applicants without a required on-site licensed security guard; Option B would approve the project but require a licensed security guard 24 hours per day. Staff recommended the commission conduct a public hearing, receive testimony, and choose one of the two options. Staff also recommended the project be found categorically exempt under California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) section 15301 (existing facilities). Mr. Harkey, planning staff, told the commission that choosing Option A would still allow staff or the zoning administrator to require a security guard later if the conditions are not followed or if adverse impacts arise.

The project would authorize operation of a 30-bed emergency shelter targeting youth ages 18 to 24 and a drop-in youth center serving people ages 14 to 24. As described to the commission, staffing levels proposed are about 5–8 staff from 8 a.m. to 8 p.m.; two shelter-specific staff from 8 p.m. to 10 p.m.; and one night-shift staff manager from 10 p.m. to 8 a.m. The security plan submitted by the applicants outlines continuous monitoring of 12 cameras, perimeter fencing and gates, a single monitored entry point, staff roles and training, and client intake and exit procedures. The site is zoned IPD (Industrial Park District).

Jimmy Waldron, executive director for Bridal Home Services and the applicant, said the organization has operated on the site for about 31 years and currently operates a 55-bed shelter. Waldron argued the proposal narrows the population served and reduces beds compared with prior operations. He told commissioners that requiring a 24-hour licensed guard would add an estimated $250,000 in annual costs and said those funds would better support services such as job readiness, counseling and case management. "All we're asking is that we're reducing the number of beds provided, and we're narrowing the population down to 18 to 24 for shelter and 14 to 24 for the family drop in center," Waldron said.

Speakers representing nonprofit and security perspectives testified. Carly Kulinic, a security professional who identified herself as an owner/operator of B and R Private Security and Mad Intronics, said vulnerability assessments should drive a staffing requirement and that, based on the historical record, a standing 24-hour guard would be costly and may not be justified. Several nonprofit speakers, including Michael Grabhorn (board president, High Desert Homeless Services), Kevin Mahaney (cochair, Desert Region Homeless Committee; Family Assistance Program), Jose Chavez (youth drop-in center manager, FAMSpot), and Steviana Evans (board member, Family Assistance Program), urged approval of Option A without the mandatory 24-hour guard. They emphasized trauma-informed care, the potential chilling effect of uniformed guards on youth seeking help, and the limited funding nonprofits must raise to operate services.

Commissioners asked detailed questions about intake hours, night staffing, camera monitoring, volunteer and paid-intern support, and clinical assessments. Jose Chavez described intake and assessment procedures that include a health assessment, substance-use screening, a SPDAT vulnerability screening tool, and referrals to mental health and substance-abuse resources (including Victor Community Support Services, SARC, and St. Mary’s bridge program). Chavez said intakes are expected to occur during daytime drop-in center hours (8 a.m.–8 p.m.) and that 24-hour intakes are not planned under the current proposal. Waldron and staff confirmed facility access is controlled (one locked entrance with a bell) and that cameras are viewable from staff desks; volunteers and a paid-intern program were discussed as ways to increase monitoring at peak loads.

The commission discussed the permit’s conditional nature: Mr. Harkey confirmed the conditional use permit could be modified, revoked or otherwise adjusted if conditions are not met, and that staff will review monthly reports required by the conditions of approval. Those monthly reports would enable staff to require modifications to the security plan, including adding a security guard, should community impacts or noncompliance arise.

Vice Chair Messon moved to approve Option A (approval based on the submitted security plan without a required licensed security guard), Commissioner Marshall seconded, and the commission voted 5–0 (Commissioners Marsh, Marshall, Thomas, Vice Chair Messon and Chair Kurth voting yes). The motion included finding the project categorically exempt under CEQA section 15301 and adopting the resolution associated with the Option A approval of the conditional use permit.

The permit approval allows the TAY shelter and drop-in operations to proceed under the conditions of approval; staff retains authority to review the monthly reports and require changes, including a security guard, if warranted by compliance or community impacts.