Doria at Stonegate
- Thread starter test
- Start date
Ok, I just read that in phase I of the Doria Apts, there will be 60 units out of which only 10 units are reserved for those who will be receiving services through the Orange County Health Care Agency?s Mental Health Services Act. Nothing on this doc. saids anything about "serious" mental illness...
When done, the Doria Apts is supposed to have a total of 134 units.
http://www.jamboreehousing.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=124:celebrating-two-firsts&catid=38:whats-new&Itemid=39
When done, the Doria Apts is supposed to have a total of 134 units.
http://www.jamboreehousing.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=124:celebrating-two-firsts&catid=38:whats-new&Itemid=39
kayochan said:
Orange County MHSA Housing
Safe, affordable housing is a basic need in all of our lives, and it is essential to individuals and their families who are working on recovery from serious mental illness.
http://www.ochealthinfo.com/mhsa
SecretGarden
New member
I definitely think the mentally ill should be entitled to safe, affordable housing but I think this situation could bring down the value of Stonegate and more specifically discourage families with children from moving there once they hear about it.
How do others feel about this? Please post your thoughts.
How do others feel about this? Please post your thoughts.
irvinehomeowner
Well-known member
I'm not sure how this would affect home values.
To be frank, any neighborhood can have the mentally ill move in... anyone's next door neighbor can be a special needs person, a KPop connoisseur, an Android addict, an icicle gun maker or even a 3CWG-obsessed donut eater.
Personally, I would be more worried about power lines, toxic soil and road/freeway noise.
To be frank, any neighborhood can have the mentally ill move in... anyone's next door neighbor can be a special needs person, a KPop connoisseur, an Android addict, an icicle gun maker or even a 3CWG-obsessed donut eater.
Personally, I would be more worried about power lines, toxic soil and road/freeway noise.
yellowplum
New member
blitzjs said:
Agree with blitzjs. The criteria for the target population are unclear:
For the purposes of this program, the following definitions and criteria apply to the target population:
1. Adults or Older Adults means adults with serious mental illness as defined in Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5600.3 (b) (1).
2. Children or adolescents with severe emotional disorders as defined in Welfare and Institutions Code 5600.3 (a) (1), and their families.
3. ?Homeless? means living on the streets, or lacking a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence. (This includes shelters, motels and living situations in which the individual has no tenant rights.)
4. Individuals who are ?at risk of homelessness? include:
?Transition-age youth (as defined in Welfare and Institutions Code Section 5847(c), and in Title 9, California Code of Regulations, Section 3200.80) exiting the child welfare or juvenile justice systems
?Individuals discharged from institutional settings including:
?Hospitals, including acute psychiatric hospitals, psychiatric health facilities (PHF), skilled nursing facilities (SNF) with a certified special treatment program for the mentally disordered (STP), and mental health rehabilitation centers (MHRC)
?Crisis and transitional residential settings
?Individuals released from local city or county jails
?Individuals temporarily placed in Residential Care Facilities upon discharge from one of the institutional settings cited above
?Individuals who have been assessed and are receiving services at the county mental health department and who have been deemed to be at imminent risk of homelessness, as certified by the county mental health director.
Source:http://www.dmh.ca.gov/Prop_63/mhsa/Housing/default.asp
How many of these units are available in Irvine? (not affordable housing, but development under this MHSA?)
Not sure if this is a complete list for the state:http://www.dmh.ca.gov/Prop_63/mhsa/docs/MHSAHousingProgramApplicationOverview.pdf
god knows im both crazy and poor, so perhaps i fit in...
anyways, even though it's true there are crazies everywhere, i think it's a bit different when its specifically zoned as such. i know only a few of the 134 planned are allocated for the "ill", but still. I'd have to believe the overall perception, right or wrong, would be negative.
For me, I dunno, I think I'm just going to stay away from Stonegate...
anyways, even though it's true there are crazies everywhere, i think it's a bit different when its specifically zoned as such. i know only a few of the 134 planned are allocated for the "ill", but still. I'd have to believe the overall perception, right or wrong, would be negative.
For me, I dunno, I think I'm just going to stay away from Stonegate...
I find this thread a bit troubling. I am wondering if anyone on this board has friends or family members that are dealing with mental illness. Perhaps we should hear from you. The term "mental illness" covers a variety of conditions. Yes, some mental illness may cause problems. But other conditions do not.
Although the topic of assisted living was secondary to this thread, I have a parent in assisted living. The problem with assisted living facilities is not the residents as much as the architectural changes that sometimes accompany them. I have seen some homes that have undergone extensive renovations so as to accommodate extra residents and increase cash flows. I would be concerned about impacts to the aestheics of the community.
Although the topic of assisted living was secondary to this thread, I have a parent in assisted living. The problem with assisted living facilities is not the residents as much as the architectural changes that sometimes accompany them. I have seen some homes that have undergone extensive renovations so as to accommodate extra residents and increase cash flows. I would be concerned about impacts to the aestheics of the community.
test said:
Why Tustin Legacy wasn't chosen - higher cost keeps the riff raff out.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tustin Legacy Alternative Site
In response to community input during scoping for the EIR, the feasibility of developing an alternate site on the former Marine Corps Air Station (MCAS), Tustin was evaluated. The MCAS Tustin Specific Plan/Reuse Plan Project area encompasses approximately 1,606 gross acres. The majority of the Plan area, 1,511 acres, lies in the southern portion of the City of Tustin. The Land Use Plan contains thirteen (13) separate land use designations. There are 444.6 gross acres available for residential development and development of up to 4601 dwelling units. Approximately 20 percent of the Plan area has been dedicated to recreation and open space uses, including an approximate 84-acre Urban Regional Park, a 25-acre Community Park. The area is now called Tustin Legacy.
Kisco Senior Living, who will be the developer of the proposed Project on behalf of the Diocese, has looked in the Tustin Legacy area to acquire an 8 ? to 10-acre site for a senior living community for several years. As recently as 18 months ago, land owners wanted approximately $2 million per acre for the land. More recently, owners have discussed a land price of $1.5 million per acre (Ferrero 2009). Tustin Legacy is in a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District (CFD) which allows for financing of public improvements and services. A special tax lien is placed against each property in the CFD and property owners then pay the tax each year. By law (Proposition 13), the special tax cannot be directly based on the value of the property. Instead, taxes are based on mathematical formulas that take into account property characteristics such as use of the property, square footage of the structure and lot size. Parcels evaluated by Kisco Senior Living included a property tax rate up to the County maximum of 2 percent (Ferrero 2009). In addition to the higher property taxes, redevelopment of the 84-acre regional Park (Legacy Park) would include a master association as well as sub-associations. Based on discussions, it is anticipated that association fees would be approximately $300,000 per year for an 8- to 10-acre parcel, subject to final design plans.
The proposed Project site was donated to the Catholic Diocese in 1958 with the intent that the land would be used to fulfill the faith-based mission of the Diocese. To develop a senior living community in the Tustin Legacy area, the Diocese would need to sell the land it owns outright in the NTSP and purchase land at Tustin Legacy. If sold, the land would most likely be developed as single family homes. As discussed above, land at Tustin Legacy would cost between $12 million and $20 million, depending on cost per acre and parcel size. Furthermore, the higher tax rate of the CFD (2 percent) at Tustin Legacy would cost the Diocese between 240,000 and 400,000 annually, a dramatic increase over property taxes costs for the NTSP land. In addition to increased taxes, land at Tustin Legacy would result in annual association fees of approximately $300,000. The high costs of land, annual property taxes, and association fees makes the development of senior living community at Tustin Legacy more difficult, and less economically viable as compared to the proposed Project site in the NTSP. Finally, the Diocese believes that selling the donated land, and its likely development as single family homes by a home-builder, would undermine the trust established between donors and the faith-based mission they choose to support when gifting the land to the Catholic Church. It is essential to the Church?s mission that trustworthiness and respect for donor intent are maintained by assuring that donations are used for the purpose expressed. Consequently, Tustin Legacy Alternative Site has been rejected from further analysis.