Agenda Item 14: Emergency Shelter, Low Barrier Navigation Center, Supportive Housing, Large Group Homes, and Manufactured Housing Regulation Code Amendment.

These amendments are part of a broader update to the Fullerton Municipal Code in response to state laws and the adoption of the housing element. Jonathan Kwan presented this item.

Kwan: “I will be presenting Application RP2024-10, focused on updating the code per state housing laws. Here’s a bit of background:

“The City of Fullerton’s Housing Element update highlights the urgent need for additional affordable housing and services to support residents experiencing homelessness. This update introduces new policies and programs aimed at removing existing barriers to the development of various housing types, including manufactured homes, supportive housing, emergency shelters, group homes, and low-barrier navigation centers. Ultimately, these programs are designed to ensure compliance with state laws regarding these housing types.

“Each of the five housing types is governed by either state laws or specific policy actions within the housing element. For example, emergency shelters are linked to AB 139 and AB 2339 regarding Library Navigation Centers. Supportive housing aligns with AB 2162 and Policy Action 3.17. Large group homes are associated with Policy Action 3.4K, as is manufactured housing.

“This matter was presented to the Planning Commission on December 12th, where additional information was requested. The item was continued to February 12th, at which point it was approved with a vote of 3 to 1, allowing it to proceed to the City Council. A modification was made to the definition of emergency shelters to align with state law. The original definition stated that an emergency shelter may include a low-barrier navigation center; however, it was revised to specify that an emergency shelter shall include other interim interventions, including but not limited to navigation centers, housing, and respite or recuperative care.

“Given the complexity and overlap among the various housing types, the following slides aim to summarize and differentiate these uses:

1. Emergency Shelters: Emergency shelters provide temporary housing with minimal support services for homeless individuals. Occupancy is generally limited to six months or less, and these shelters operate on a first-come, first-served basis. This category includes navigation centers, bridge housing, and respite or recuperative care.

2. Low Barrier Navigation Centers: These shelters are designed to have low barriers to entry, prioritizing connections to housing. They allow for partners, pets, personal item storage, and privacy. Unlike traditional shelters, low-barrier navigation centers do not operate on a first-come, first-served basis; instead, they prioritize tenants based on the duration of homelessness, health risks, and utilization of crisis services. The focus is on “housing first” principles, which accept applicants regardless of their sobriety status, completion of substance abuse treatment, participation in services, credit history, rental history, or unrelated criminal records. They also accept referrals from shelters, outreach programs, and other crisis services.

3. Supportive Housing: Supportive housing assists a target population in improving their health and maximizing their capacity to live independently. There is no limit to the length of stay, and it may include non-residential uses and offices related to supportive housing. It encompasses transitional housing and youth housing, as well as traditional housing for both youth and adults. Examples include transitional housing, senior housing, and veterans’ housing.

4. Group Homes: Group homes accommodate various populations, including individuals with disabilities or mental health conditions. They are classified into two categories: large and small group homes. A large group home has seven or more occupants, while a small group home has six or fewer. Group homes can also be licensed or unlicensed. Unlicensed group homes provide housing and some level of care or supervision without the requirement of state licensing or certification. This category may include independent living facilities that do not offer medical care. Once a group home provides a certain threshold of services, it must obtain a license from the state. A licensed group home is a care facility that offers supervision and care to individuals with disabilities, including those facing mental health challenges, as well as seniors. The specific uses and regulations of these homes are defined by their licenses.

5. Manufactured Housing: Manufactured housing refers to home units that are primarily or entirely constructed off-site before being transported to the property where they will be set up. Two terms often used in this context are “mobile homes” and “manufactured housing.” However, there is a key distinction between the two: mobile homes are defined as factory-built housing constructed before June 15, 1976, while manufactured homes are those built after that date. Manufactured homes must comply with the building codes established by the Department of Housing and Urban Development and are thus regulated by the state.

6. Modular Homes: Modular homes are a type of factory-built housing that complies with local building codes. A question raised at the Planning Commission was whether accessory dwelling units (ADUs) would be allowed in areas where manufactured housing is permitted. The answer is that the type of construction does not affect the permitting of ADUs.

Kwan stated, “To summarize the proposed amendments, the terms outlined in this context either represent changes to existing definitions or the introduction of new definitions. These modifications aim to eliminate restrictions on the development of various housing types and ensure compliance with state law.

“We also have a table that displays new and revised zones where specific uses are permitted. Starting with the non-residential zones, the zones are listed at the top, while the permitted uses appear on the left. Existing uses are indicated in black, and proposed changes are shown in blue. For example, emergency shelters, low-barrier navigation centers, and supportive housing would all be permitted in the C3 zoning district. This change aligns with state law requirements, which mandate that these uses must be allowed in non-residential zones where multifamily housing is permitted, and the C3 zone meets this requirement.

“Now, moving on to residential zones, there are no changes to the permitting of emergency shelters, low-barrier navigation centers, supportive housing, or small group homes. However, for large group homes, the code previously required an Administrative Use Permit (AUP) for all residential zones. This requirement will be changed to allow them by right in all residential zones, consistent with state law. The same modification applies to large residential care facilities for the elderly and unlicensed group homes. Additionally, manufactured housing would be permitted in all zones where single-family homes are allowed, including mobile home park zones.

“Another change made to the permitted uses table in the residential zone section is the introduction of a new heading for retirement complexes. Previously, retirement complexes were grouped under residential care facilities; this new heading separates the two. No changes are proposed for retirement complexes. Here’s a clearer summary of the new and amended development standards:

“Restrictions have been removed for manufactured housing, as well as for supportive and transitional housing. The parking requirement for emergency shelters has been revised to depend on the number of employees rather than the number of beds. New development standards have also been introduced for supportive housing projects of up to 50 units in the CPD zone, along with provisions for low-barrier navigation centers.

“In summary, the proposed amendments eliminate constraints on the development of manufactured homes, supportive housing, emergency shelters, group housing, and low-barrier navigation centers. These amendments align with the city’s housing element and comply with state law.

“With this in mind, staff recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance amending Title 15, Zoning of the Fullerton Municipal Code. This includes updates to sections 15.04.040 (Definitions), 15.17.020 (Permitted Uses), 15.17.030 (Criteria for Permitted Uses), 15.30.030.3 (Permitted Uses in the C3 Zoning District), 15.30.040 (Limitations on Permitted Uses), 15.42.050 (General Site Development Standards), 15.42.060 (Review Procedures), 15.55.020 (Special Use Permits with Provisions), and 15.55.030 (Conditionally Permitted Special Uses). That concludes my presentation.”

Public Comments

Curtis Gamble: I am an activist for the homeless, veterans, Cal State Fullerton students, OCTA bus drivers, and the low-income community. I would like to express my support for this item. I believe the staff has done an excellent job.

However, I want to highlight a few important points. Our current municipal code regarding emergency shelters is outdated. It is no longer just about emergency shelters; we now have a variety of services, including emergency shelters, recuperative care, medical respite, bridge housing, and low-barrier navigation centers.

I live at the Bulletin Navigation Center, which serves as both an emergency shelter and a recuperative care facility that offers medical respite. Unfortunately, our current code does not reflect these additional services, and they should be included.

If you look at the back of the agenda, particularly the last page, you can see the Anaheim municipal code listed there. Anaheim’s code is no longer limited to emergency shelters; it encompasses emergency shelters, recuperative care, and medical respite, and it was last updated in 2025.

I believe that all 34 cities should adopt language consistent with Anaheim. The Bulletin’s code has been updated to align closely with Anaheim’s. Notably, Anaheim removed certain language in 2016 regarding “first come, first served” policies and clarified that days of stay do not have to be consecutive within a 365-day period. This means a person could stay for a total of six months in a year, with the days not needing to be consecutive. These adjustments are crucial and should be incorporated into our code.

Overall, while our code has been updated, it still needs to be consistent with Anaheim’s, which expanded its codes from 2 pages to 8 pages in 2016 following my legal action against the city of Fullerton for $1,000,000. (That money was donated to help build Citrea Apartments).

City Council Remarks

Mayor Fred Jung said, Alright, are there any other comments? If not, I’d like to bring this back to the Council. Do any council members have questions?

Councilmember Dr. Ahmad Zahra said, “This, as I understand it, is the minimum state requirement, right? So this is what the state is mandating us to do: modify our code. Have we looked at other cities? And best practices? Maybe we’ll still look at state minimum requirements, but maybe they are more conducive to actual practical application.

City Staff Member Jonathan Kwan responded, “Yes, we’ve looked at surrounding cities, and for the most part, most cities are consistent with what Fullerton is proposing.”

Zahra said, “OK, so the comparison was made, that would be good. I am also looking at the recuperative care part that was mentioned by Mr. Gamble because I know the one we have here is unique. I think it might be the first that has both navigation and recuperative care. Is that something that needs to be in this ordinance?

Kwan responded, “Well, the code now, with the amended definition for emergency shelter it, includes recuperative care, and so if there was a respite and recuperative care facility being proposed, it would be regulated under the same codes.

Zahra asked, “So this allows for that, correct? Good. Regarding comparisons between this and what we have done in the past, we have three navigation centers: two regional ones and, of course, the one here in Fullerton. How different or similar is what is being proposed here to what we have done before?”

Kwan responded, “I’m sorry, I don’t fully understand the question.”

Zahra continued, “Many years ago, when we established the Navigation Center, we participated in the Placentia and Buena Park regional navigation centers, and there’s the one here in Fullerton. Do those meet the new standards, or are there any differences?”

Kwan replied, “I’m assuming they went through the same regulations. The only standard we’re changing for emergency shelters is the parking requirement; instead of requiring a specific number of parking spaces, it will now be based on the total number of employees on shift.”

Zahra said, “Got it. One last question. I know we now have requirements for some of these group homes, and they’ll be located in residential areas.”

Kwan confirmed, “We already have those to a certain degree.”

Zahra inquired, “To what extent does the city have oversight over these? I remember a lawsuit from some time ago, but I’m not sure of its current status or the level of oversight the city has.”

Kwan explained, “The state’s position is that large group homes should be treated like any other residential development.”

Zahra asked, “So if a new one is proposed, it would be regulated by the base zoning standards? If the use requires state licensing, that license would set the limits and regulations for the large group home?”

Kwan affirmed, “Yes, so they are regulated by the state, not by the city.”

Zahra clarified, “So we don’t have a direct say in their activities?”

Kwan responded, “That’s correct.”

City Planning Manager Chris Schaefer added, “If I could provide some additional information when a new application is submitted to the state, the city is notified, and that letter goes to the planning department. We review those applications and provide a notice of opposition if we believe the location isn’t suitable or if it is too close to another use that we deem inappropriate. We do receive those notices; I would say maybe one or two a year at most since I’ve been here.”

Zahra concluded, “So there is a process through which the city is involved, and these homes aren’t just appearing without our knowledge. That’s good to clarify. Thank you very much; I appreciate your time.”

Jung said,” The sober living home lawsuit that you speak of, Sir, with Costa Mesa leading the way, that hasn’t been adjudicated in court yet, is still being litigated. So we’ll find out. All right. Any other questions? All right, we’ll go ahead and close this public hearing and I’ll seek a motion to approve this.

Approved unanimously, Dunlap was absent.

To read full code visit: https://codelibrary.amlegal.com/codes/fullerton/latest/fullerton_ca/0-0-0-8886#JD_15.17.030