Laserfiche WebLink
<br /> <br />Ordinance No. NS-XXX <br />Page 4 of 27 <br /> <br />residents plus a resident manager, which is more than twice the average California <br />household size. <br /> <br />T. All individuals residing in a sober-living facility are generally over the age of 18, <br />while the average household in the United States has just 1.96 individuals over the <br />age of 18 according to federal census data. <br /> <br />U. Because of their transient populations and above-average numbers of adults <br />residing in a single home, group homes (including sober-living facilities) present <br />impacts to residential neighborhoods not typically associated with more traditional <br />single-family uses, which contributes to the institutionalization of residential <br />neighborhoods and residential care environments, which in turn reduces the <br />benefits of residential environments for disabled residents in group living <br />arrangements. These impacts include: the housing of large numbers of unrelated <br />adult who may or may not be supervised; excessive noise and outdoor smoking, <br />which interferes with the use and enjoyment of residential neighborhoods; little to <br />no interaction with the neighborhood; irresponsible operators with a history of <br />opening facilities in complete disregard of the Code and with little regard for <br />impacts to the residential environment; disproportional impacts from the average <br />dwelling unit to nearly all City services including sewer, water, parks, libraries, <br />transportation infrastructure, fire and police; a history of congregating in the same <br />general area. <br /> <br />V. Among other things, this Ordinance establishes a 650-foot distance requirement <br />between group homes, which provides many opportunities for the operation of <br />group homes within the City and still results in preferential treatment for group <br />homes that serve disabled individuals as compared to group homes serving non- <br />disabled individuals in a similar living situation (i.e., in boarding house-style <br />residences) which cannot operate in residential zones. <br /> <br />W. Housing inordinately large numbers of unrelated adults in a single-residence or <br />congregating group homes in close proximity to each other does not provide the <br />disabled with an opportunity to “live in normal residential surroundings,” but rather <br />subjects them to living environments that resemble the types of institutional living <br />that the FEHA and FHAA were designed to provide relief from for the disabled, <br />and which no reasonable person could contend provides a life in a normal <br />residential surrounding. <br /> <br />X. Notwithstanding the above, the City Council recognizes that, when operated <br />responsibly, group homes (including sober-living homes) provide a societal benefit <br />by providing the disabled the opportunity to live in residential neighborhoods, as <br />well as providing recovery programs for individuals attempting to overcome their <br />drug and alcohol addictions. Providing greater access to residential zones to group <br />homes, including sober-living homes, than to boarding houses provides a benefit <br />to the City and its residents. <br /> <br />Y. Without sufficient, appropriate regulation, there is no way to ensure that the <br />individuals entering into a group home are disabled individuals and entitled to the <br />protections under local and state law; that a group home is operated professionally