Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Behavioral Health topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Board upholds Planning Commission approval for Nuova Vista congregate care expansion after appeal
Summary
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors denied an appeal and approved an expansion of the Nuova Vista congregate care facility in South Sacramento to 140 beds, adding conditions aimed at neighborhood outreach, security and prioritizing county residents.
The Sacramento County Board of Supervisors on Feb. 25 denied an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval and authorized an expansion of the Nuova Vista congregate care facility near the Southwest corner of Roosevelt Avenue and 40th Street in South Sacramento.
The board's action upholds the Planning Commission's findings and approves a use permit, special development permit and design review that will allow the existing Nuova Vista facility to expand from about 53 to 140 beds on a 3.35-acre site, subject to a set of conditions and a mitigation monitoring program tied to the facility's mitigated negative declaration under CEQA.
The expansion drew sharply divided public comment. Neighbors, represented at the hearing by the South Sacramento CPAC and residents, urged denial, saying the neighborhood is already overburdened by social-service uses, experiences higher crime and environmental stressors, and that the facility has not done sufficient outreach. Supporters, including Synergy representatives and current staff and neighbors who live adjacent to the campus, described property improvements, volunteer activity by residents, on-site medical oversight and services for people with severe mental illness.
Planning staff said the project conforms to applicable zoning and general-plan policies when conditioned and that the environmental review (a previously prepared mitigated negative declaration plus an addendum) identified mitigation measures to reduce biological, cultural and other impacts to less-than-significant levels. Project planner Leanne Mueller summarized entitlements and described revisions to the landscaping plan that restored screening along the residential edge.
Synergy's representative Brian Holloway and onsite manager Ricardo Alumada described existing operations and on-campus supports: a staffed medication room, clinicians, peer-support staff, regular patient sign-in/out procedures, and periodic use of drug-detection canine searches. Synergy's vice president Linda Kaufman described the client profile (a high proportion diagnosed with schizophrenia and many with medical comorbidities) and said many residents receive long-acting injectable medications and frequent clinical oversight.
In response to neighborhood concerns, the board required additional conditions beyond those in the Planning Commission package. Those conditions include requiring perimeter fencing with controlled entry/exit, annual open-house outreach to the immediate neighborhood, an annual filed report to the Board of Supervisors documenting outreach and any neighborhood concerns and their resolution, a three-part pre-admission assessment for prospective residents, a stated priority for Sacramento County residents for available beds, and a minimum of three annual canine drug-detection sweeps on campus. Supervisors also discussed the board's continuing authority to re-open or revoke the permit if operational conditions are not met.
The motion to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission decision was moved by Chair Phil Serna and carried unanimously. The board directed staff to include the additional conditions in the final permit documents and to monitor compliance via the required annual reports.
