Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Recovery topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Bradenton holds first reading on new rules for certified recovery residences; council seeks parking, inspection clarity
Summary
On first reading the council reviewed Ordinance 4069 to add certified recovery residences into the land‑use and form‑based code with a reasonable‑accommodation process; staff and council focused questions on parking, occupancy limits, state certification and inspection responsibilities; second reading set for March 25.
The council held the required first hearing on Ordinance 4069, which implements state requirements for certified recovery residences and creates a city process for reasonable‑accommodation requests.
Planning Director Robin Singer explained the ordinance imports the state's definition of a certified recovery residence (a non‑licensed, state‑certified sober‑house model) and classifies recovery residences under the city’s existing group‑home/group‑care categories. The ordinance adds definitions to both the land‑use regulations and the form‑based code and designates where group care homes or facilities may be approved as special uses (T4–T6 transect zones and special districts).
Council members focused on practical operating questions: parking (how many on‑site spaces are required when a residence houses multiple people), occupancy limits and signage, how state certification and periodic inspection would be documented for the city, and whether the city could require annual inspections or certificates of compliance. Fire/inspection staff noted that a change‑of‑use and occupancy review can trigger annual inspections and fire‑safety requirements; Singer said the city could require proof of state certification and could consider inspection protocols consistent with the city’s authority.
Vice Mayor Coker and Councilwoman Moore expressed concern about unregulated, informal recovery‑house operations and asked whether the ordinance would give the city tools to address occupancy and nuisance pressures (parking on grass, sidewalk blockage). Staff said larger facilities (more than six residents) are treated as group care facilities and that special‑use review offers an opportunity to require parking and compatibility conditions. Singer emphasized that reasonable‑accommodation requests must be processed promptly under federal and state non‑discrimination rules; Council may consider alternative accommodations if a requested modification creates an undue financial or administrative burden.
No final action was taken on the ordinance at first reading; the second reading and public hearing are scheduled for March 25. Staff said the ordinance codifies state obligations while preserving Council review for special‑use permits and reasonable‑accommodation requests.
