Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Group Homes Ada topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council hears staff, attorney explain ADA limits on zoning treatment homes; conditions suggested
Summary
The meeting included discussion of temporary residential treatment homes (4'6 residents). Staff and the city attorney said federal law (ADA and DOJ guidance) limits the city's ability to exclude such homes from residential zones but that local conditions (parking, kitchens, square footage, notice/conditional-use requirements) may be applied.
Council members and planning staff discussed draft code language that would permit transitional treatment or group homes for qualifying disabilities (typically non-active substance use disorders receiving treatment) as conditional uses in residential zones, while adding local standards to mitigate neighborhood impacts.
Tyson, the city attorney, told the meeting that the Americans with Disabilities Act restricts a city from prohibiting group residences that serve people with qualifying disabilities: "We can't prohibit these types of treatment facilities, residential group homes, if they are for qualifying disabilities." He and staff noted that federal guidance and the Department of Justice view reasonable accommodations differently for group homes serving persons with disabilities, and cities may only impose conditions that are reasonable and not discriminatory.
Staff and commissioners discussed practical standards the city could impose if such homes are permitted, including limits on resident counts (the draft language discussed 4 to 6 residents), parking requirements, minimum square footage per resident, separation of living units or kitchens where appropriate, and whether facilities must obtain Department of Health approvals. Shelby (staff) and other participants said the health department already enforces some square-footage and separation requirements for licensed transitional facilities, which the planning process should incorporate.
Points of contention and clarification: Council members asked how terms such as "violent" or "qualified disability" are defined in the code; staff said the city code did not include all definitions and that some clarifications rely on state or federal law and licensing standards. Staff also noted that conditional-use findings permit denial if an "unmitigatable detrimental effect" (for example, an inability to provide required parking or otherwise mitigate impacts) exists.
Next steps: Staff recommended continuing to treat such facilities as conditional uses pending a broader code update (eventually converting frequently-applied conditional uses into permitted uses with fixed standards), and council members asked staff to return with clearer definitions and possible conditions related to parking, kitchens, restrooms and separation standards.
