Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Group Homes topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Residents appeal Planning Commission approvals for two group homes; city attorney cites Fair Housing and ADA limits
Summary
At the May 13 meeting the Little Rock Board of Directors heard staff summaries and legal guidance on appeals to Planning Commission approvals of special-use permits for group homes at 205 North Woodrow Street and 822 North Monroe Street, prompting questions about reasonable accommodations under federal law.
The Little Rock Board of Directors on May 13 considered appeals filed against Planning Commission approvals of special-use permits that would allow group-home operators to house residents at 205 North Woodrow Street and 822 North Monroe Street.
Planning staff summarized the two appeals: Z-9891-B at 205 North Woodrow Street seeks approval for an 11-resident group home in an R-3 zone; Z-9892-B at 822 North Monroe Street seeks approval for an eight-resident group home in an R-2 zone. Planning Commission had approved both permits by 7–0 votes; for the Woodrow Street case two commissioners recused.
The board heard questions about ordinance definitions and the legal framework that governs group homes. “We have the provision about 8 homes being presumed to be of 8 persons being presumed to be a family as a reasonable accommodation based upon decisions from the US Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit pursuant to the Fair Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act,” City Attorney Tom Carpenter told the board.
Carpenter explained that federal disability law affects whether a locality may deny a request related to group homes. He said courts generally limit localities’ ability to impose rules that would discriminate against people with disabilities, and that issues local governments may properly consider include traffic, parking and noise. Carpenter noted a prior Eighth Circuit decision in which local ordinance language and the record before the governing body affected the court’s summary-judgment analysis.
Planning staff provided details the board requested: the Woodrow Street house is about 4,650 square feet and proposed to serve 11 residents with on-site parking for staff and street parking for residents. The Monroe Street house is about 2,800 square feet for eight residents with two staff parking spaces and six on-street spaces for residents.
Board members asked for additional materials and presentations. Director Miller asked for a presentation and supporting materials ahead of any hearing; another board member requested a combined presentation for items 27 and 28. The board did not overturn the Planning Commission approvals at the May 13 meeting; staff said they would provide memos and presentations to the board and that a public hearing will be set in accordance with procedure.
Why it matters: the appeals raise questions about how local zoning, reasonable-accommodation rules and federal Fair Housing and disability law intersect when group homes seek to locate in residential neighborhoods. The number of residents at each property — 11 and 8 — matters legally because the city’s ordinances and case law create presumptions and standards that the board must consider when evaluating reasonable-accommodation claims.
No final decision on the appeals was made May 13; the board requested legal memos and presentations from planning staff and the city attorney before a hearing and vote.
