Home Page

Background

People with drug and alcohol problems are defined to be legally handicapped under the federal Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) and, this, protected from illegal discrimination. In 1984 (and further amended in 1989, 1992 and 1993), the California legislature passed an amendment to Health and Safety Code 11834 (Sections 11834.20 - 11834.25) that governs small residential drug and alcohol rehab facilities that service 6 or fewer patients. With the growing need for such rehab facilities and for the greater public good (and with the understanding that the natural tendency of existing residents is "not in my backyard"), this law allowed the placement of these small facilities in residentially-zoned (R1)neighborhoods, irrespective of local zoning ordinances.

These sections of Health and Safety Code 11834 exempt such residential drug and alcohol rehab facilities with 6 or fewer patients from local city and county zoning codes, ordinances and other restrictions - except to the extent such restrictions would be applied to any other residence, e.g. building codes and fire and safety regulations.  These facilities are licensed by, and operate under the oversight of, the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (ADP). While there is an impact on traffic and parking even from a small group home or rehab facility, the position of both the federal and state governments is that this could and should be absorbed for the greater good of the community whose needs are being met by these homes and facilities.

In summary, such facilities are regulated by the State and not the local authorities and must be treated in every way by local authorities as if they were, in fact, single family residences. As long as a facility is operating within the scope of its license, no restrictions, fees, licenses, permits or other impediments can be placed on them that are not also placed on all single-family residences in the area. In addition, the State legislation places no explicit restrictions on how close these facilities can be placed to each other. For example, in Malibu and Newport Beach there are several such facilities that share common property lines. 

Bayside Marin

In the Bayside Acres subdivision, Bayside Marin (owned and operated by CRC Health Group) operates two such adjacent facilities at 189 and 191 Bayview Drive which were first licensed by ADP in June, 2004. Such licenses must be renewed every 2 years. Bayside Marin also operates a residential facility at 47 Tweed Terrace in the Loch Lomond subdivision which first received an ADP license on August 1, 2006. This property shares a common property line with 191 Bayview Drive. CRC Health Group purchased the Bayside Marin business from its original owner and CEO, Mr. Perry Litchfield, and the licenses were re-issued for all three facilities on August 24, 2007. The expiration date is July 31, 2009.

The owner of all three of the residential properties is Mr. Perry Litchfield who rents them to CRC Health Group/Bayside Marin. He has also purchased 180 Bayview Drive in Bayside Acres (across the street from 189 and 191 Bayview Drive).That property has completed renovation and is also leased to CRC Health Group.  CRC has stated that they are applying for the same license as the other 3 facilities they lease and intends to operate it as a fourth residential rehab facility and expect to be operational in March or April, 2009.

In summary, Bayside Marin has created a large campus that now includes three residences covering about three acres straddling two residential neighborhoods (soon to be four facilities and over four acres), as well as a large supporting commercial space on Fourth Street in downtown San Rafael. This campus, comprising 189 and 191 Bayview Drive and 47 Tweed Terrace, is now licensed by ADP to serve 18 patients with an estimated staff of more than 60 based on documentation from the ADP. With the addition of 180 Bayview Drive, the total facility will house 24 patients.

Neighborhood Preservation Association

After a community-wide meeting on June 26, 2006, 8 residents from Bayside Acres and Loch Lomond began the formation of a Neighborhood Preservation Association (NPA) to address the concerns and issues that the community had expressed regarding the effect of these facilities on the peaceful enjoyment and quality of life in our neighborhood, especially due to Bayside Marin's rapid growth and clustering. We believe that such a multi-residence campus is contrary to both the intent and the letter of the California statutes and regulations as well as having a serious negative effect on the surrounding residential community. On July 19, 2006 the NPA was organized and a set of Objectives were formulated.

If you wish to contact the NPA to offer information, comments, personal support or for any other reason, please use the form on the Contact Us page. Also use this form if you wish to be added to the NPA e-mail list or have other information that you believe might be useful.

This Website

This website was created as a vehicle to keep the community informed regarding the activities of the NPA, information regarding the owners and operators of residential care facilities in our community such as Bayside Marin, and provide appropriate contacts within Marin County agencies, California State agencies and the State legislature. The News & Events page provides information as it becomes available and posted by date. Check it often for updates.   The Other Contacts & Links page provides contact information so the community can communicate their issues and concerns with its elected and appointed officials. The Archives page provides access to documents, articles and similar information related to the objectives of the NPA.

On September 13, 2006, the NPA submitted a complaint to the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Programs (ADP) regarding Bayside Marin's operations at the three licensed facilities.  This complaint alleges that Bayside Marin is operating these three facilities as a campus with shared services and facilities in violation of the California statutes and ADP regulations governing such facilities.The text of the Complaint, attachments, additional Addenda and other related documents can be found in the Archives section of this website.

On August 23, 2007, the ADP issued its ruling on the NPA complaint. It is the NPA's position that the ADP investigation and subsequent ruling ignored substantial information regarding issues raised in the NPA complaint and failed to address several specific allegations contained in the complaint. 

The NPA is actively involved with other community and governmental organizations throughtout the State of California that are addressing many of these same issues. We are also following closely the complaint filed by the City of Sausalito in Marin County Superior Court against the Alta Mira Treatment Program (AMTP) complex (8 licensed residential rehab facilities). Many of the issues stated in that legal filing mirror the issues that were included in the NPA's complaint to the ADP, only in this case they will be heard in court. That complaint and related documents regarding the Alta Mira situation can be found in the Archives section of this website. The News & Events section will contain information regarding this situation as well.