Title
a. Receive an update from Public Works, Facilities and Parks (PWFP) on the independent assessment in response to Board Referral #2022.16 - feasibility of consolidating the Youth Center with the New Juvenile Hall;
b. Provide direction to staff on capital planning objectives for Probation youth facilities.
Report
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors:
a. Receive an update from Public Works, Facilities and Parks (PWFP) on the independent assessment in response to Board Referral #2022.16 - feasibility of consolidating the Youth Center with the New Juvenile Hall;
b. Provide direction to staff on capital planning objectives for Probation Youth facilities.
SUMMARY:
This report details the findings of a third-party independent analysis on the feasibility of consolidating the Probation Youth Center at 970 Circle Drive, Salinas into the 1420 Natividad Road, Salinas campus (New Juvenile Hall). In June 2022, the Board of Supervisors took action to combine REF 2021.17 with REF 2022.16 and continue direction to County Administrative Office (CAO) staff to conduct a feasibility assessment. The referral was assigned to Public Works, Facilities and Parks (PWFP) in September 2022. PWFP Staff contracted Nacht & Lewis (N&L) to perform the initial assessment based on over 30 years’ experience analyzing juvenile facilities and relevant codes and regulations.
N&L analyzed juvenile population profiles, bed counts, and code requirements to develop conceptual space planning options (Attachment A). The analysis concluded that while consolidation is possible (Options 6A/6B), it is not ideal due to construction costs and operational challenges. Based on projected costs for new construction, the most effective option is to invest in the existing Youth Center facility. Separate analysis would be required to evaluate whether staffing positions could be consolidated if programs were transferred from Youth Center to New Juvenile Hall. The analysis does not assess the geotechnical and environmental factors that have been historically challenging at the New Juvenile Hall site.
DISCUSSION:
Scope of Assessment
In response to the consolidated Referrals 2021.17 and 2022.16, Staff engaged N&L as subject matter experts to conduct a feasibility study. The study focused on three areas:
- Determine if the entire Juvenile program could be located at the New Juvenile Hall without additional construction: This option is not feasible.
- Determine if the entire Juvenile program could be located at the New Juvenile Hall if the site was expanded: Possible with extensive new construction. See “Results: Options 6A/6B” below.
- Determine additional options for accommodating the entire Juvenile program primarily at the New Juvenile Hall site with additional site options, including the Youth Center and/or a new site to be determined. See “Results: Alternatives” below.
To determine if the entire Juvenile program could be consolidated at the New Juvenile Hall, N&L met with County stakeholders, conducted a tour of the New Juvenile Hall and Youth Center sites, researched Juvenile program population profiles and needs, examined existing facilities for viability and code compliance, and reviewed relevant Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC), fire code, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) requirements.
Analysis: Population Profiles
N&L analyzed current youth populations across the Juvenile program. There are nine distinct population groups housed at the Juvenile Hall and Youth Center which have separate programming, education, recreation, and security needs, plus Department of Juvenile Justice (DJJ) Secure Track populations which are currently housed in proximity to other Juvenile populations:
- Juvenile Hall: (6 distinct populations) Age, complexity and severity of crimes, and youth risk are key considerations in separating populations.
o General Population: Medium Security
o General Population: High Security
o High Risk/Long Detention
o Girls and Transgender Youth
o Special Program and Safety Needs
o Secure Youth Treatment Facility/Furloughs
- Youth Center: (3 distinct populations) As with youth at Juvenile Hall, age, complexity and severity of crimes, and youth risk are key considerations in separating populations.
o Age 14-15 year olds: Less criminally sophisticated, gender identification could put youth at risk, identified mental or developmental/cognitive disabilities, present socially or emotionally immature.
o Age 16 and older: Moderately criminally sophisticated, present with age-appropriate emotional and social maturity.
o Age 17 and older: Highly criminally sophisticated, present with age appropriate emotional and social maturity.
- Secure Track: Populations generally display more violent and sophisticated criminal behavior. Many of these offenders are older, sentenced as juveniles but have aged into adulthood. They may have different education, program and security needs than grade school detainees. BSCC has determined that 18-25 year olds in the Secure Track program with violent and sophisticated criminal behavior do not meet the definition of adult inmates, and therefore are not required to be separated from minor populations currently housed in the Juvenile Hall and Youth Center programs; however, best practices and risk aversion suggest separation is prudent. The space planning options provided in the assessment follow this sight and sound separation best practice.
Analysis: Bed Counts
In addition to population groups, N&L projected bed counts using County data for annual intakes per 1,000 population and average length of stay. Population data was taken from Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc. (Esri) and the California Department of Finance (DOF). Considering an average construction timeline of five years, the analysis based its space planning on population projections for 2028-2030. Covid-19 impacted population counts, and tracing trends with COVID-impacted statistics resulted in an unrealistic projection of zero population by 2025. Another rejected scenario used average pre-COVID intake and length of stay rates, but N&L determined these higher bed count projections were unrealistic. Instead, N&L used pre-COVID lows as a baseline for future intakes and average length of stay. BSCC guidelines add a 15% peak use and management factor to account for particularly high intakes and special considerations for individual youth needs. Final projected bed counts based on pre-COVID lows are: Juvenile Hall: 48 beds, Youth Center: 40 beds, Secure Track: 36 beds.
Analysis: Program, Support and Recreation Code Requirements
The County cannot move beds from the Youth Center to the New Juvenile Hall without also bringing the other necessary administrative and operational spaces. Title 24 and Title 15 set minimum standards for planning, design and operation of juvenile facilities. Design requirements include but are not limited to: recreation space, visiting space, dining areas, day use and program space. All options developed by N&L take space requirements into consideration and include some combination of new and/or renovated kitchen, laundry, storage, visiting and program space to address these needs.
Results: Space Planning Summary
To accommodate the projected bed count and associated programming space needs, N&L developed seven options for the Juvenile program in various site configurations:
- Option 6A/6B locates all populations at the New Juvenile Hall site with extensive new construction and site expansion. New construction space is estimated at more than 61,500sqft.
- Options 1, 2 and 5 include new construction locating one or more populations at a new site TBD. Renovation and new construction space is estimated between 37,000 and 64,000sqft.
- Options 3, 4 and 7.1/7.2 maintain one or more populations at both the New Juvenile Hall and Youth Center sites. Renovation and new construction space is estimated between 27,000 and 42,000sqft.
To estimate costs, staff used a rough order of magnitude construction cost of $500/sqft for renovation and $800/sqft for construction. This estimate does not include soft costs such as staff time, construction management, architectural services, special testing and inspection, California State Fire Marshall costs, etc.
Results: Options 6A/6B - Single Site Consolidation
N&L developed two variations on a single-site consolidation (Options 6A/6B). Option 6-A would construct a new three-story combined Youth Center and Secure Track facility, along with new kitchen and administration buildings. The multi-story building presents more complex design challenges including fire egress from 2nd and 3rd floors, elevator installations, and an institutional design rather than the preferred campus layout. The analysis estimates 61,600 sqft of new construction. Construction cost is estimated at $49,280,000.
Option 6-B eliminates the multi-story building but requires expansion into adjacent parcels. This expansion would require relocation and new construction of the existing Probation administration building and Juvenile Court facility. This option may not be feasible due to the intrusion on existing court facilities. The analysis estimates 66,600 sqft of new construction. Using the same estimate of $800/sqft would place the construction cost at $53,280,000.
Results: Alternatives
The analysis provides several alternatives to single-site consolidation.
Option 1 maintains the New Juvenile Hall and Youth Center populations in the current configuration (11,600 sqft renovation) and adds Secure Track as new construction (25,500 sqft) on a separate site to be determined. The analysis notes a search for a suitable and acceptable site may take years. Construction cost is estimated at $26,200,000.
Options 2 and 5 propose replacing the Youth Center site with a new location to be determined and constructing either Secure Track housing or both Secure Track and Youth Center housing at this new location. These options require extensive new construction (between 61,500 and 64,000 sqft), and the analysis notes a search for a suitable and acceptable site may take years. Construction cost is estimated between $49,280,000 and $51,200,000.
Options 3 requires the least combined amount of renovation (11,600 sqft) and new construction (15,600 sqft) and is projected to be the least costly. The analysis identifies Option 3 as the best use of existing facilities and investments. Construction cost is estimated at $18,280,000.
Option 4 adds Secure Track housing to the Youth Center site as new construction (27,300 sqft) and renovates the existing Youth Center (11,600 sqft). The topography of the Youth Center site could make new construction more complex and costly. Construction cost is estimated at $27,640,000.
The analysis recommends Option 7.1/7.2 as the ideal grouping of youth populations. These options move the Secure Track population to the current Youth Center and consolidate Youth Center populations to New Juvenile Hall in a newly constructed housing and classroom/visitation space. The options are variations of new construction and renovation with construction cost estimated between $29,880,000 and $34,960,000.
Recap of Findings
Consolidating all Juvenile populations at the New Juvenile Hall is possible if new construction is completed, though the option is not considered ideal. N&L emphasized that there is no way to consolidate all housing at the Juvenile Hall facility without significant construction using a multi-story solution, and/or displacing the existing courthouse. Site limitations would present operational challenges to meet Board of State and Community Corrections (BSCC) and code requirements to provide necessary housing, programming and recreation space, and recommended sight/sound separation. The current Youth Center would require renovation if it were to remain in use. Ultimately the County will need to weigh the pros and cons of each option to determine an appropriate course of action.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
This report was reviewed by the Office of County Counsel as to form and Probation department for technical accuracy. PWFP worked directly with N&L to obtain this independent study.
FINANCING:
As of writing this report, PWFP has recorded $13,752 in direct staff time costs and $68,222 in consultant fees. Additional analysis will require a new proposal from N&L and additional staff time costs. If the Board recommends one of the options provided in this report, PWFP staff will work with the CAO Budget Office to identify any potential sources of funding. Significant construction costs may be incurred to complete construction of new facilities or renovations, regardless of the option the Board selects.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STRATEGIC INITIATIVES:
The report presents options on Probation Juvenile operations with comments on the feasibility and cost of running one or more Juvenile program locations. The report meets the Board’s Strategic Initiative Administration goals by evaluating ways to promote efficient and effective resource management.
Economic Development
X Administration
Health & Human Services
Infrastructure
Public Safety
Prepared by: John Snively, Administrative Operations Manager, 831-759-6617
Reviewed by: Florence Kabwasa-Green, Interim Chief of Facilities
Lindsay Lerable, Assistant Director of Public Works, Facilities and Parks
Approved by: Randell Ishii, MS, PE, TE, PTOE
Director of Public Works, Facilities and Parks
Attachments:
Attachment A - Space Planning Options
(Attachments are on file with the Clerk of the Board)