Laserfiche WebLink
they tend to be larger than average single housekeeping units, creating impacts <br /> on water, sewer, roads, parking and other City services that are far greater than <br /> the average household, in that the average number of persons per California <br /> household is 2.86. A sober-living facility allowed as a matter of right can house six <br /> residents plus a resident manager, which is more than twice the average California <br /> household size. <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 hasjust 1.96 individuals over the <br /> age of 18 according to federal census data. <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 /> 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 /> 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 /> 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 /> Ordinance No. NS-3084 <br /> Page 4 of 27 <br />