Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout05 - Zoning Amendment - Group Living UsesCOUNCIL GCE 011, CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. 22 September 14, 2004 TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robin L. Clauson, Acting City Attorney; (949) 644 -3131, rclauson @city.newport - beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Zoning AmendmenUGroup Living Uses ISSUE: Should the City Council adopt amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) pertaining to group living uses that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional law? RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council introduce the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code that are attached as Exhibit A and pass to the next meeting for adoption. DISCUSSION: The proposed amendments have been considered by the Planning Commission and City Council at numerous public hearings. The ordinance presented with this memo differs from previous versions in the following respects: 2. 3. The definition of "Family" has been amended to make it clear that the term applies to a "traditional' family and to six or fewer handicapped persons regardless of whether they are living together as a "Single Housekeeping Unit." The definition of 'Residential Care General' has been modified to clarify that the term applies only to seven or more handicapped persons who are not living together as a "Single Housekeeping Unit' and that the term does not apply to any number of unrelated handicapped persons who are living together as a "Single Housekeeping Unit." The provisions related to the findings for a Federal Exception Permit have been modified to: (a) clarify that a permit is not necessary for any unrelated handicapped persons who are living together as Housekeeping Unit'; (b) that there must be substantial evidence in to support any decision not to issue a Federal Exception Permit; slightly revise the nature of the findings that must be made to Federal Exception Permit. number of a "Single the record and (c) to approve a ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). Submitte by' / i is / Robin L. Clauson, Acting City Attorney DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.10.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING USES WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City's Zoning Code provisions regulating all group living regulations should be amended to ensure conformity with the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments ( "FHAA," 42 USC § 3601) and various provisions of State law including, without limitation, to provide procedures that allow the City to receive, evaluate and approve applications to accommodate uses protected by State and Federal law; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the fundamental precept of the City's Zoning Code provisions relative to residential zones is that individual dwelling units are intended for the occupancy and use of "families" (now defined as "Single Housekeeping Units ") and that persons who are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit should be prohibited from residing in the same dwelling unit in all the City's residential zones; and WHEREAS, the City Council further finds that when persons are living together as a Citv's residential zones. reaardless of whether thev are related by blood. marriaae or otherwisein- as -wad; and WHEREAS, the City has. because of provisions of State and Federal law, made an exception to the requirement that dwelling units in residential districts be occupied only by a Single Housekeeping Unit by defining groups of –Fe&kl—& ;ai--asc�six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of that person's major life activities who are living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained the opinion of Dr. Michael Gales, a medical doctor specializing in recovery from chemical dependency, that the recovery of persons suffering from drug or alcohol dependency is properly accomplished in residential groups of between four and six persons, which, under the proposed code amendments, can locate in any residential zone of the City without the need for any discretionary permits—.; and WHEREAS, the City finds that this ordinance complies with, and implements, the FHAA by establishing a reasonable accommodation process, initiated by filing an application for a "Federal Exemption Permit ", that is available to any person who desires to establish a residential facility serving 7 or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, except for the provisions of this ordinance that permit or conditionally permit persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities to live in residential districts as other than a Single Housekeeping Unit, the City does not desire to permit or conditionally permit other groups of persons not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit to reside together in a single dwelling unit in any of the City's residential zones; and WHEREAS, during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, substantial evidence has been presented that confirms there is a high degree of transiency among group home residents, that transiency (due to the failure of an occupant to comply with rules or the successful completion of a program) is an important element of certain group living arrangement, that group home residents often come from outside of Newport Beach with the intent to reside here for a very limited period of time and to leave Newport Beach upon completion of the program or treatment that caused them to become residents—i and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that persons who occupy dwelling units without the intent to reside long -term in the community have, on average, less incentive than persons who intend to make the community their permanent residence to engage in conduct that contributes to the neighborhood and its residents and to refrain from conduct that annoys or disturbs neighbors -Land WHEREAS, the City Council has received extensive testimony during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance and has received evidence on other occasions that dwelling units with short term or transient occupants, when compared to occupants of dwelling units who intend to permanently reside at that location, generate more frequent complaints related to noise, profanity, trash, illegal parking and other conduct that would disturb a person of ordinary sensitivity; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance (Chapter 5.95 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code) that regulates the conduct of property owners and occupants of dwelling units that are occupied by short term lodgers to address the problems caused by this type of occupancy -hand WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, based on testimony received during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, individual group residential facilities within 300 feet of one another have been used to provide services to the occupants of other similar facilities creating a "campus" effect resulting in the short term intensification of uses in the neighborhood that is now serving the occupants of the other dwelling units and resulting in adverse impacts related to noise, traffic and parking. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 foot radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the K buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen /food service area for the occupants of the other buildings. "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, single - family" means a building containing one dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The term "Family' shall include "Residential Care - Limited" facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally disordered or otherwise handicapped persons regardless of whether they are living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit, but shall not include ae another living group that is not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are an interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit including the joint use of common areas and sharing household activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. For purposes of the R -A and R -1 zones, a Single Housekeeping Unit's members shall also be a non - transient group. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non - residential, non - medical care and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty -four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to, nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group Residential" means shared living quarters occupied by more than one person, v'ithp -it which lack separate kitchen and ef- bathroom facilities for each room or unit�as well all shared living quarters occupied by two or more persons not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. upit unless expr^°o1„ nn +o.+ nt4eP.- i °° This classification includes boarding houses, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, and private residential clubs, but excludes R e sid €;ti aI Gage 'miter Pesidnnfnl /;,e QeneFal „d residential hotels (see Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section 20.05.050(EE)(4)). "Residential Care, Limited" means shared living quarters (without separate kitchen and e� bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to, group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. 3 "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters (without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities when such persons are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Single- Family Residential" means a building or buildings containing one dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile homes and factory built housing. "Two- Family Residential" means a building or buildings containing two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile homes and factory built housing. SECTION 3. The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters (without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities when such persons are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. SECTION 4. Subsection H of Section 20.10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H. Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District. Provides areas for single - family residential and light farming uses. Single - Family Residential (R -1) District. This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide for a stable, social neighborhood for single - family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses with the total gross floor area of all buildings limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. El Two Family Residential (R -2) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses. Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single - family, two - family, and multiple family residential land uses. SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the land uses defined in Chapter 20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and includes special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter "P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "PDIU" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "P /UP" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when located on the site of a conditional use. The letters FEP designate use classifications for which a Federal Exception Permit must first be obtained pursuant to Chapter 20.91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations P = Permitted 1UP = Use permit PD /U = Use permit issued by the Planning Director L = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) FEP = Federal Exception Permit = Not Permitted — IR -1.5 R -2 IMFR Additional i i Regulation i 'RESIDENTIAL. .... (- I I. __ _ ._...J� ___..._:SSA), (B), (C) _v Day- Care, Limited - - .--- ._..I� IP -- IP___.__.___---- _,I�.. _ �P .lGroup Residential Residential Care, Lim,ted IP P ._......_._..._ .0 are ..._ P I_. _I_ iP _ P !Residential Care, General _.• FEP IFEP FEP gle- family Residential fP P P P P tifamily Residential ! -. �... p (p) )- Family Residential ;• PiP (D) 5 I i JBLIC AND SEMI - PUBLIC I ! (B) %,Cemeteries 'L -1 L -1 1-1 !L -1 1 IClubs and Lodges i -- ;L -2 1L -2 !L -2 ,}Convalescent Facilities [Day -Care, General ! - -- UP UP !UP !UP Up ,U� UP --- -� ;Government Offices UP UP UP }U�, Hospitals— — ..._._.. !UP!UP -.... UP UP ��. I ....... -- — — !Parkand Recreation +Facilities 'UP •,UP I UP UP UPS— ,Public Safety Facilities (UP UP UP UP iUP —� :Religious Assembly UP UP jUP (UP U� UP !UP :UP .... iUP - - -- - -_ UP ; -- SUP 1 (Schools, Pubuc and Private ;UP ;UP jUtd!t!es, Major ,UP UP ;Utilities, Minor.._.._ ......... .....iP P _IP_... p IP r-- '(A). (B), (C) r COMMERCIAL USES !Horticulture, Limited P Nurseries PD/ chicle /Equipment Sales and'! !Services ! ..... I I y - Commercial Parking ;Facility I - -- � IL-3 I !L -3 1 -3 IL -3 I .. .. _..... - . . ..... ..... ..._. Visitor Accommodations j -Bed and Breakfast Inns SRO Hotels Residential H t e _ ........ ...._._._....._. . _..... :..... _:�..._...__. .UP ,... UU ;(F) — SUP , F ;AGRICULTURAL AND ;EXTRACTIVE USES (A), (B), (C) ._ - ;Animal husbandry !PD/ �- :___ G (Crop Production ;Mining and Processing jL -4 L- IL-4 ;L-4 iL -4 i(H) • t ACCESSORY USES :Accessory Structures and ' ,es P/� U P/U •P /UP !P /U ;P /UP RI) —I. ;TEMPORARY USES.. L..... —I . �I(A), (B). (C) 0 rcuses and Carnivals jP :P P P P )mmercial Filming, Limited:P P P P )rsonal Property Sales rP - -`P P P P aliports, Temporary L -i -- __. L -5 _:1. aal Estate Offices, !mporary L -5 fL -5 L 5 IL -5 L -5 __......_..__.. Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L -3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L -4: See Chapter 20.81, Oil Wells. L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -1 Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short term lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short term lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (F): See Section 20.60.110, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: 1. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. b. Other Large Animals. Other large animals, including goats, sheep, pigs and cows, may be kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet or more and the number shall not exceed two adult animals of any one species. C. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant tc Chapter 7.08 of the Municipal Code. 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. 4. Control. a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of the owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure. (H):See Chapter 20.81, Oil Wells. (1): See Section 20.60.100, Home Occupations in Residential Districts. (J): See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K):Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code. (L): See Section 20.60.120, Personal Property Sales in Residential Districts. (M):See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued in any case where a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terms of this code unless and until such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit has been granted by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit granted. SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. SECTION 8. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically assigned to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to initially review and approve or deny an 1:1 Exception. The City Council shall have final decision - making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits filed concurrently with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision. After the conclusion of the hearing on any application for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit, the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirty -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision. Upon the rendering of a decision on a use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site. SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit. Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. it shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain application for a Federal Exception Permit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for a Federal Exception Permit under those conditions when otherwise required by state or federal law. i and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. b. Nonresidential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the, applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. A description of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4. A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an administrative decision. E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.035 Required Findings. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception in Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A. For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 2. That the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That because of special circumstances. applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 4. The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal Exception Permits 2A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the permit and application process necessary to obtain a 'reasonable accommodation" as that term is used in the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments (FHAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA. The application for a Federal Exception Permit shall be approved unless there is substantial evidence in the administrative record that establishes that one or more of the findings for approval cannot be made. Federal Exemption Permits are subject to the enforcement provision contained in Chapter 20 -,96. 11 1. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped - related. 2. The ^^^"^^ ^f has deFAGRStF tee that +h living group is not residing in the Dwelling or Dwellings f� �a #e4v as a Single Housekeeping Unit. 3. The Federal Exception Permit, if approved, would aeitheFnot require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a municipal the Federai F=xn pti^^ Permit program nor impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City_ I.'h' ^h ^ ° ^f°^ ^^ Rd ^ I;aFdSh'^ ea the To the extent authorized by law, the factors the Planning Commission or the City Council on review or appeal may consider in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: (ii) whether the nature and/or extent of vehicular traffic, such as the frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iiiv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11. Section 20.91.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being or will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off - street parking facilities and prohibitions against assembly uses as determined in each case. The following conditions shall be imposed upon the issuance of any Federal Exemption Permit: 19 A. The permittee shall limit overnight occupancy of the Dwelling Units(s) to no more than the number of occupants permitted by the provisions of Title 15 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. B. The permittee shall use best efforts to ensure that the occupants do not create unreasonable noise or disturbances, engage in disorderly conduct, or violate provisions of this Code or any law pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol, or the use of illegal drugs. C. The permittee shall, upon notification that occupants and /or guests have created unreasonable noise or disturbances, engaged in disorderly conduct or committed violations of this Code or law pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol or the use of illegal drugs, promptly use best efforts to prevent a recurrence of such conduct. D. The permittee shall use best efforts to ensure compliance with all the provisions of Title 6 of the Municipal Code (garbage, refuse and cuttings). E. The permittee shall post, in a conspicuous place within the dwelling unit, a copy of this permit and /or the operational rules specified in this Section. SECTION 12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.95, the permit shall not become effective unless and until a decision granting the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the City Council. SECTION 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of approval or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval unless: 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or 2. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced; or 13 3. A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or 4. The use is established; or 5. A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin until the effective date of approval of the coastal permit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be made in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date. C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation. Procedures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. B. New Applications. If an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no new application for the same, or substantially the same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless the denial is made without prejudice. SECTION 15. Severability. . If any provision or clause of this Chapter or the application thereof is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, clauses or applications of this Chapter which can be T implemented without the invalid provision, clause or application, it being hereby expressly hereby declared that this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, adopted, and /or ratified irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, and /or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 16: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 24th day of August, 2004, and adopted on the 14th day of September, 2004, by the following vote, to -wit: AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS • •: ATTEST: CITY CLERK F:users/caft /sha red / Ordinance /GroupHomes /09- 14- 04dft.doc 15 .k92- 111 lbl MRS. CAROL MARTIN 1824 West Ocean Front Newport Beach, California 92663 September 14, 2004 Newport Beach City Council Newport Beach City Manager 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca. RE: Agenda Item #22- Council Meeting 9114104 Dear Gentlemen: It is a great disappointment to review the above numbered proposal for facilitating neighborhood integration of group homes. This proposal has almost no criteria for issuing a FEP and no penalties for violations as would be imposed on a licensee for transient occupancy. It is my impression that the City has rolled over like a puppy when faced with the rehab operators' attorneys. I am very aware of the Federal guidelines, State regulations, and court cases and recognize that they are to be respected. However, it also is appropriate to respect the needs of the community. Both the Council and Planning Commission have heard the experiences of the Kovelys, the direct neighbors of Narcanon at 1808 West Ocean Front, and seen his pictures of the properties which clearly exemplifies damage to a neighbor by overuse of a property. The Planning Director's August 24h e-mail response to him does not reflect sensitivity to this problem. This leads one to wonder whether the modifications found in the proposed legislation are also the result of lack of understanding of the community's needs. If this proposal were to be salvaged these changes could be considered: SECTION 11: 20.91.040 B. The permittee shall - - -- ensure that the occupants C . ...... promptly ----- prevent a recurrence of such conduct. D. The permittee shall - - -- -ensure compliance Thus the wording `use best efforts" is eliminated because it is ineffective. SECTION 13: 20.91.045 B. Time Extension Not to exceed 2 years rather than 3 years. I respect the many hours that you and the staff have spent on these matters and am disappointed that Newport Beach has not been successful in being California's "lighthouse" showing the legislative direction for other California cities as well. Sincerely, 4-46 ��� Carol Martin Message rage i of i Bill Martin From: Temple, Patty [PTemple @city.newport- beach.ca.us] Sent: Tuesday, August 24, 2004 4:54 PM To: 'WKSignCo @aol.com' Subject: RE: [BULK] 1810 NARCONON Mr. and Mrs. Kovely, I have let you know that we know of no violations of zoning or occupancy codes for this property. The use of the property is considered to be a legal, non - conforming use, which has the right to operate as legally established. The operation was also legally established prior to the adoption of the current Use Permit requirement. The fire department did review and establish occu[ancy limits, but you may not know that those limits, as established in the UBC allow a high number of people to be inside the building. Also, the city had no rules for any residential area which wouid limit group gatherings of any nature, social or otherwise. Patricia Temple Planning Director - - - -- Original Message---- - From: WKSlgnCo @aol.com [mailto:WKSignCo @ aol.com] Sent: Saturday, August 21, 2004 11:53 AM To: Ptemple @city.newport- beach.ca.us Subject: [BULK] 1810 NARCONON Importance: Low Patti Temple ... We own the property next to NARCONON. 1808 W. Oceanfront. Please help us. There is so many people being dropped off at NARCONON during the day 40 to 60 people a day. It's unbearable!! You are not enforcing the zoning anf occupancy codes. What's the deal ? ?? Is it the money coming in to the city from NARCONON?? WE DON'T UNDERSTAND.!! It seems everyone at City Hall is fighting us. Fire codes are not being enforced, use permits, etc. Our family sure couldn't do what NARCONON is doing. You would bust us in a New York minute. Too bad we don't have lawyers and money to give to the city. Oh wait, I forgot, we pay taxes and all your salaries. Hmmmm, should you not be working for us ? ?? Thank you for, H Violette Kovely and Bill Kovely 8/25/2004 0 V N « O C 'O E uo CO'S c C > c y c H Q- 010 0 u3o O z 0 QY Z d « V C � O� � d y C O 01 Y d 0 W 3 C Q O 0. LL U3o�QULL Z= °oiena Z O S` g� o .. N E N C v v d LL O -C L 00 0 2 Z pl ZC O 'a Za Os x; 'Q co Zun rnd E 'a LL T 0 i 0 x d. _o Q o Z� to a ZZ Y N O � � O O mO) C O 3 O O N JO " O C O 7 N t z �O 3 'o u N 3 C O c c v c w F LL o `° ` N d 06 W u N Y .. O OI C 7 ° 2 C v°i U d p N W C M 'u w w E v O x t d 0 c° o. 1� � COUNCIL AGENDA NO.2a • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT Agenda Item No. is August 24, 2004 TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robert Burnham, City Attorney; 644 -3131, rburnham(cDcity. newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment/Group Living Uses ISSUE: Should the City Council adopt amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) pertaining to group living uses that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional law? RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code that are attached as Exhibit A. BACKGROUND: The Planning Commission and City Council have conducted a number of public meetings and public hearings on proposed amendments to the Zoning Code pertaining to group living uses in residential districts." On August 10, 2004, the • City Council introduced the proposed ordinance after modifying the definition of "Campus" and directing staff to make certain non - substantive changes to the text. ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). Submitted by: 1 Robert Burnham, City Attorney • DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.10.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City's Zoning Code provisions regulating all group living regulations should be amended to ensure conformity with the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments ( "FHAA," 42 USC § 3601) and various provisions of State law including, without limitation, to provide procedures that allow the City to receive, evaluate and approve applications to accommodate uses protected by State and Federal law; and WHEREAS, the City Council funds that the fundamental precept of the City's Zoning Code provisions relative to residential zones is that individual dwelling units are intended for the occupancy and use of "families" (now defined as "Single Housekeeping Units ") and that persons who are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit should be prohibited from residing in the same dwelling unit in all the City's residential zones; and I • I WHEREAS, the City has made an exception to the requirement that dwelling units in • residential districts be occupied only by a Single Housekeeping Unit by defining group residential uses for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of that person's major life activities as a Single Housekeeping Unit; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained the opinion of Dr. Michael Gales, a medical doctor specializing in recovery from chemical dependency, that the recovery of persons suffering from drug or alcohol dependency is properly accomplished in residential groups of between four and six persons, which, under the proposed code amendments, can locate in any residential zone of the City without the need for any discretionary permits. WHEREAS, the City finds that this ordinance complies with, and implements, the FHAA by establishing a reasonable accommodation process, initiated by filing an application for a "Federal Exemption Permit ", that is available to any person who desires to establish a residential facility serving 7 or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities; and WHEREAS, the City Council funds that, except for the provisions of this ordinance that permit or conditionally permit persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more major life activities to live in residential districts as other than a Single Housekeeping Unit, the City does not desire to permit or conditionally permit other groups of persons not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit to reside together in a single dwelling unit in any of the City's residential zones; and • 9: WHEREAS, during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, substantial • evidence has been presented that confirms there is a high degree of transiency among group home residents, that transiency (due to the failure of an occupant to comply with riles or the successful completion of a program) is an important element of certain group living arrangement, that group home residents often come from outside of Newport Beach with the intent to reside here for a very limited period of time and to leave Newport Beach upon completion of the program or treatment that caused them to become residents. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that persons who occupy dwelling units without the intent to reside long -term in the community have, on average, less incentive than persons who intend to make the community their permanent residence to engage in conduct that contributes to the neighborhood and its residents and to refrain from conduct that annoys or disturbs neighbors. WHEREAS, the City Council has received extensive testimony during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance and has received evidence on other occasions that dwelling units with short term or transient occupants, when compared to occupants of dwelling units who intend to permanently reside at that location, generate more frequent complaints related to noise, profanity, trash, illegal parking and other conduct that would disturb a person of ordinary sensitivity; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance (Chapter 5.95 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code) that regulates the conduct of property owners and occupants of dwelling units that are occupied by short term lodgers to address the problems caused by this type of • occupancy: and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, based on testimony received during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, individual group residential facilities within 3900 feet of one another have been used to provide services to the occupants of other similar facilities creating a "campus" effect resulting in the short term intensification of uses in the neighborhood that is now serving the occupants of the other dwelling units and resulting in adverse impacts related to noise, traffic and parking. NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 foot radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen/food service area for the occupants of the other buildings. "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or • more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. -2- "Dwelling, single - family" means a building containing one • dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The term "Family" shall include "Residential Care - Limited" facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally disordered or otherwise handicapped persons, but no other living group that is not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are an interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit including the joint use of common areas and sharing household activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. For purposes of the R -A and R -1 zones, a Single Housekeeping Unit's members shall also be a non - transient group. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non - residential, non - medical care • and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty -four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to, nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group Residential" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. This classification includes boarding houses, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, and private residential clubs, but excludes Residential Care - Limited, Residential Care - General, and residential hotels (see Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section 20.05.050(EE)(4)). "Residential Care, Limited" means shared living quarters (without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to, group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. • -3- "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters • (without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life. activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Single- Family Residential" means a building or buildings containing one dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile homes and factory built housing. "Two- Family Residential" means a building or buildings containing two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile homes and factory built housing. SECTION 3. The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: • "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters (without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit) for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments that substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. SECTION 4. Subsection H of Section 20. 10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H. Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows: Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District. Provides areas for single - family residential and light fanning uses. • Single- Family Residential (R -1) District. This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide IEIE for a stable, social neighborhood for single - family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. • Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses with the total gross floor area of all buildings limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. Two Family Residential (R -2) District. Provides areas for single- family and two family residential land uses. Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single - family, two - family, and multiple family residential land uses. SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the land uses defined in Chapter 20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and includes special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter "P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on • approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "PD/U" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "P /UP" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when located on the site of conditional use. The letters FEP designate use classifications for which a Federal Exception Permit trust first be obtained pursuant to Chapter 20.91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. Districts: Land Use Regulations = Permitted P = Use permit YU = Use permit issued by the Planning Director = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) ?P = Federal Exception Permit = Not Permitted 1.5 -5- _..SIDENTIAL �I... .- ...... .;� .......... .... L........... 1�........ _._.. Care, Limited j Group esidential 1 - -- p....._ . ............ I_._._....._.._....i(-'.'. Residential Care, Limited F Residential Care, General ��� j FEP j FEP Single- family Residential 11P IP Multifamily Residential ;� —'IF Two- Family Residential - - - PUBLIC AND SEb9I -PUBS ici'F jF —F i�— Cemeteries i - -- L -1 L -1 L -1 Clubs and Lodges !F_ L -2 L -2 L -2 Convalescent Facilities UP UP UP Day -Care, General UP UP UP Government Offices -IUP UP Hospitals ;F_ UP UP , UP fW-- Park and Recreation Facilities . FYP UP UP UP UP Public Safety Facilities UP UP UP UP UP igious Assembly ols, Public and Private UP UP UP � UP UI' d ......... ...._._..I .._....... Utilities, Major UP UP UP UP UP ����� . Utilities, Minor��� . .. ...... +Ir... . . .:Ir . ... ,.. .:Irk... ... ;'Ir ... ..- _.,..._..._...�I� ........... ........_. ;..,_ ......... FI..1 . COMMERCIAL USES�!� -F ; (A), (B), (C) j Horticulture Limited FP Nurseries PD/ i_ Vehicle/Equipment Sales and Services Commercial Parking Facility ; -• ; L 3 jLL -3 L -3 L -3 ��I_ ..._.__ __._.-.. 1�_.I ..._ ...,..._......., i ........ .... __.. Visitor Accommodations .................... _.... ........ !......_............1.... Bed and Breakfast Inns j[... Up (P) -SRO Residential Hotels T. AGRICULTURAL AND 1 1 (A) (g) (C) EXTRACTIVE USES I I it ial husbandry ; PD/ �.- F_......�... -- (C) i -6- i Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L -3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L -4: See Chapter 20.9 1, Oil Wells. • L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -I Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short terns lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short tern lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (F): See Section 20.60,1 10, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: I. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. • -7- "Crop Production P Minim and Processing L -4 L -4 ! L-4 ' L -4 L-4 H 1 ACCESSORY USES � I I � � A (B C Accessory Structures and Uses ! P/[JP P/CJP P/CJP P/CJP P/[JP TEMPORARY USES �L.. _ _.....- _... _. _ �C ... _ _ll._ L--- ____..-- __il (AB , C _), (___ >_c__> 1 1Circuses and Carnivals._.._.....__.. J�P- ....._______...JI!.._,._....... Commercial Filming, Limited _l'Ir_ Personal Propert y Sales P P P P P L Heliports, Temporary `FL-5 - -- L -5 7 Real Estate Offices, Temporary i L -5 L -5 L -5 L -5 Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L -3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L -4: See Chapter 20.9 1, Oil Wells. • L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -I Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short terns lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short tern lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (F): See Section 20.60,1 10, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: I. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. • -7- b. Other Large Animals. Other large animals, including goats, sheep, pigs d cows, may be kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet or more and the number shall not xceed two adult animals of any one species. C. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 7.08 of the Municipal Code. 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. 4. Control. a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of the owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure. (H): See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. (1): See Section 20.60.100, Hotne Occupations in Residential Districts. (J): See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K): Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code. (L): See Section 20.60.120, Personal Property Sales in Residential Districts. (M): See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. • L J SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shal I be issued in any case where a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terms of this code unless and until such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit has been granted by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then only in accordance with the terns and conditions of the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit granted. SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. 1.11 An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception • Permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. SECTION 8. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically assigned to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. m Exception. The City Council shall have final decision - making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Pen-nits filed concurrently with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision. After the conclusion of the hearing on any application for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception • Permit, the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirty -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision. Upon the rendering of a decision on a use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site. The Planning Commission shall have the authority to initially review and approve or deny an application for a Federal Exception Permit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for a • Federal Exception Permit under those conditions when otherwise required by state or federal law. U • SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit. Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to • the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. b. Nonresidential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days • prior to the hearing. -10- D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the • decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. A description of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4. A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an administrative decision. E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. • 20.91.035 Required Findings. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A. For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 2. That the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions udder which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; • 1Y 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, • including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 4. The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be • materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal Exception Permitsz. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped - related. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the living group residing in the Dwelling functions as a Single Housekeeping Unit. 3. The Federal Exception Permit, if approved, would neither require a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program affected by the Federal Exception Permit nor impose an undue financial or administrative burden on the City which creates an undue hardship on the City. To the extent authorized by law, the factors the Planning Commission or the City Council on review or appeal may consider in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the permit and application process necessary to obtain a `reasonable accommodation' as that term is used in the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments (FHAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA. The application for a Federal Exception Permit shall be approved unless the evidence in the administrative record establishes one of the findings for denial. • Federal Exemption Permits are subiect to the enforcement provision contained in Chapter 20 -96 -12- !3 (i) whether vehicular traffic congestion in the neighborhood would be increased to an extent that would be • contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; (ii) whether the nature of vehicular traffic, such as the frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11. Section 20.91.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case is be, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being or will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off - street parking facilities as determined in each case. The following conditions shall be imposed upon the issuance of any Federal Exemption Permit: A. The pennittee shall limit overnight occupancy of the Dwelling Units(s) to no more than the number of occupants permitted by the provisions of Title 15 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. B. The pennittee shall use best efforts to ensure that the occupants do not create unreasonable noise or disturbances, engage in disorderly conduct, or violate provisions of this Code or any law pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol, or the use of illegal drugs. C. The permittee shall, upon notification that occupants and /or guests • have created unreasonable noise or disturbances, engaged in -13- disorderly conduct or committed violations of this Code or law • pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol or the use of illegal drugs, promptly use best efforts to prevent a recurrence of such conduct. D. The permittee shall use best efforts to ensure compliance with all the provisions of Title 6 of the Municipal Code (garbage, refuse and cuttings). E. The permittee shall post, in a conspicuous place within the dwelling unit, a copy of this permit and/or the operational rules specified in this Section. SECTION 12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such • decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.95, the permit shall not become effective unless and until a decision granting the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the City Council. SECTION 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of approval or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval unless: 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or 2. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced; or A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or • 4. The use is established; or NE2 5. A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin • until the effective date of approval of the coastal permit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be made in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date. C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terns of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation. Procedures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby • . amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. B. New Applications. If an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no new application for the same, or substantially the same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless the denial is made without prejudice. SECTION 15. Severabilitv. . If any provision or clause of this Chapter or the application thereof is held unconstitutional or • otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other -15- IV provisions, clauses or applications of this Chapter which can be implemented without the invalid • provision, clause or application, it being hereby expressly hereby declared that this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, adopted, and /or ratified irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, and /or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION 16: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this Ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper within fifteen (15) days after its adoption. This Ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach held on the 10"' day of August, 2004, and adopted on the 24"' day of August, 2004, by the following vote, to -wit: • ATTEST: CITY CLERK • AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT, COUNCILMEMBERS MAYOR 16- n • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robert Burnham, City Attorney; 644 -3131, rburnham (cDcity.newport- beach.ca. us SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment/Group Living Uses COU CIL AGEN A NQ V � o Agenda Item No. 15 August 10, 2004 ISSUE: Should the City Council adopt amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) pertaining to group living uses that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional law? RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council introduce the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code that are attached as Exhibit A and pass the ordinance for second reading on August 24, 2004. BACKGROUND: On February 24, 2004, the City Council, after conducting two study sessions on the topic, initiated amendments to the Zoning Code pertaining to group • living uses in residential districts. The Planning Commission conducted noticed public hearings on the proposed amendments on May 20, 2004 and June 17, 2004. On June 17, 2004, the Planning Commission (4 ayes, 2 nays and one absent) voted to approve an ordinance similar to Exhibit A. On July 13, 2004, the City Council conducted a noticed public hearing on the proposed amendments. The City Council introduced the proposed amendments with one modification pertaining to the findings for a Federal Exception Permit. On July 27, 2004, the City Council again consider the proposed amendments, took public testimony and continued the matter to August 10, 2004 to allow staff and special counsel additional time to research and respond to legal issues raised during public testimony and in correspondence. DISCUSSION: The proposed ordinance (Exhibit A) continues to allow group living uses with six or fewer persons deemed to be "handicapped" under the FHAA (handicapped persons) in all residential zones, to require a Federal Exception Permit for group living uses with seven or more handicapped persons in the R -1.5, R -2 and MFR zones and to prohibit group living uses with seven or more "handicapped" persons in the R -1 zones and the equivalent areas in PC and PRD districts. The proposed ordinance differs from the version introduced by the City Council on July 13, 2004 in the following respects: • I . We have added legislative findings that clarify the purpose and intent of the ordinance. 2. We have modified the definition of "single housekeeping unit' to eliminate "transiency" as a criteria except in the case of group living uses in R -1 and R -A zones 3. We have incorporated standard conditions — similar to those imposed on other transient residential uses by our "Short Term Lodging Permit' ordinance - that would be applicable to all Federal Exception Permits and would address the concerns expressed by residents who live adjacent to some group living uses. Staff and special counsel believe the proposed ordinance gives the City the means to protect the character of residential areas by treating transient group living uses in the same manner as we treat short term lodgers — a similar type of land use characterized by frequent turn over of occupants. We have attached opinions from Dr. Michael Gales (Exhibit B), a specialist in the field of chemical dependency treatment, to the effect that "a residential capacity of six or fewer constitutes a sufficient number of participants to achieve the stated goals of a sober living home." ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). Submitted by: Burnham, City Attorney • • • DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 2010.010 2010.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the City's Zoning Code provisions regulating all group living regulations should be amended to ensure conformity with the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments ( "FHAA;' 42 USC 3601) and various provisions of State law, including without limitation, the requirement that the City receive, evaluate and approve applications to reasonably accommodate uses protected by State and Federal law; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the fundamental precept of the City's Zoning Code provisions relative to residential zones is that individual dwelling units are intended for the occupancy and use of "families" now defined as "Single Housekeepinq Units ") and that persons who are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit should be prohibited from residing in the same dwelling unit in all the City's residential • zones; and WHEREAS, the City has made an exception to the requirement that dwelling units in residential districts be occupied only by a Single Housekeeping Unit bV defining group residential uses for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of that persons major life activities as a Single Housekeeping Unit; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained the opinion of Dr. Michael Gales, a medical doctor specializing in recovery from chemical dependency that the recovery of persons suffering from drug or alcohol dependency is properly accomplished in residential groups of between four and six persons, which, under the proposed code amendments, can locate in any residential zone of the City without the need for any discretionary permits. WHEREAS, the City finds that this ordinance complies with, and implements, the FHAA by establishing a reasonable accommodation process initiated by filing an application for a "Federal Exemption Permit ", that is available to any person who desires to establish a residential facility serving 7 or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more maior life activities: and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, except for the provisions of this ordinance that permit or conditionally permit persons with physical or mental impairments which • substantially limit one or more maior life activities to live in residential districts as other than a Single Housekeeping Unit, the City does not desire to permit or conditionally DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. _ AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF • NEWPORT BEACH AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.10.020 AND CHAPTER 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the Citv_Council finds that the City's Zoning Code provisions regulating all group living regulations should be amended to ensure conformity with the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments ( "FHAA," 42 USC § 3601) and various provisions of State law; and WHEREAS, the City Councii finds that the fundamental precept of the City's Zoning Code provisions relative to residential zones is that individual dwelling units are intended for the occupancy and use of "families" (now defined as "Single Housekeeping Units ") and that persons who are not living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit should be prohibited from residing in the same dwelling unit in all the City's residential zones; and WHEREAS, the City has made an exception to the requirement that dwelling units in • residential districts be occupied only by a Single Housekeeping Unit by defining group residential uses for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of that persons maior life activities as a Single Housekeeping Unit; and WHEREAS, the City has obtained the opinion of Dr. Michael Gales, a medical doctor specializing in recovery from chemical dependency, that the recovery of persons suffering from drug or alcohol dependency is properly accomplished in residential groups of between four and six persons, which, under the proposed code amendments, can locate in any residential zone of the City without the need for any discretionary permits. WHEREAS, the Citv finds that this ordinance complies with. and implements, the FHAA by establishing a reasonable accommodation process, initiated by filing an application for a "Federal Exemption Permit ", that is available to any person who desires to establish a residential facility serving 7 or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more major life activities; and substantially limit one or more major life activities to live in residential districts as other • WHEREAS, during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, substantial • evidence has been presented that confirms that there is a high degree of transiency among group home residents, that transiency (due to the failure of an occupant to comply with rules or the successful completion of a program) is an inevitable feature of certain group living arrangement, that group home residents often come from outside of Newport Beach with the intent to reside here for a very limited period of time and to leave Newport Beach upon completion of the program or treatment that caused them to become residents. WHEREAS, the City Council finds that Persons who occupy dwelling units without the intent to reside loQm -term in the community have, on average, less incentive than persons who intend to make the community their permanent residence to refrain from engaging in conduct that adversely impacts neighbors and the qualitv of life within the neighborhood; and WHEREAS, the City Council has received extensive testimony during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance and has received evidence on other occasions that dwelling units with short term or transient occupants, when compared to occupants of dwelling units who intend to permanently reside at that location, generate more frequent complaints related to noise, profanity, trash, illegal parking and other conduct that would disturb a person of ordinary sensitivity; and WHEREAS, the City Council has adopted an ordinance (Chapter 5.95 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code) that regulates the conduct of property owner and occupants of • dwelling units that are occupied by short term lodgers to address the problems caused by this type of occupancy and finds that the nature of the use and occupancy defined as "Residential Care — General" has the same potential as short term lodging to adversely impact neighbors and the quality of life in neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that, based on testimony received during the public hearings preceding adoption of this ordinance, that individual group residential facilities within 900 feet of one another have been used to Provide services to the occupants of other similar facilities creating a "campus" effect resulting in the short term intensification of uses in the neighborhood that is now serving the occupants of the other dwelling units and resulting in adverse impacts related to noise, traffic and parking. WuCOCAC the Gity has adapted FegulatiGns GR di4 Feet types of g n !MRg WHEREAS, mfiRepRe Rti nnrl WHFREAC iR light Gf the Faip WGusing -/het AmendMeRt6, 42 U.S.Q. § 3604, of • NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: • "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 yard radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen /food service area for the occupants of the other buildings. "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, single - family" means a building containing one dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living together as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The term "Family" shall include "residential care, limited" facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally disordered or otherwise handicapped persons, but no other living group not living together as a Ssingle Hiaousekeeping gunit. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are an aea-trassieat, interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit, including the joint use of common areas and sharing household • activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. For purposes of the R -A and R -1 zones, a Single Housekeeping Unit's members shall also be a non - transient group. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non - residential, non - medical care and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty -four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group residential" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. This classification includes boarding houses, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, and private residential clubs, but excludes Residential Care - Limited, Residential Care - General, and residential hotels (see Single - Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section 20.05.050(EE)(4)). "Residential Care - Limited" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non - medical care for • persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. 3 "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or • bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Single- Family Residential" means buildings containing one dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. "Two- Family Residential" means buildings containing two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. SECTION 3. The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living • environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. SECTION 4. Subsection H of Section 20.10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H. Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows: Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District. Provides areas for single - family residential and light farming uses. Single - Family Residential (R -1) District. This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide for a stable, social neighborhood for single - family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses with the total gross floor area of all buildings limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. • Two Family Residential (R -2) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses. 2 Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single - family, two- family, and multiple family residential land uses. • SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the land uses defined in Chapter 20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and includes special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter "P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "PD /U" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "P /UP" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when located on the site of a conditional use. The letters RA designates use classifications for which a Federal Exception Permit must first be obtained pursuant to Chapter 20.91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. • idential Districts: Land Use Regulations P = Permitted IUP = Use permit PD /U = Use permit issued by the Planning Director L = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) FEP = Federal Exception Permit = Not Permitted R -A IRA R -1� 5— R -2 MFG R -- Additional g lation e u RESIDENTIAL _.;L-- ..._.......L_....- DayCare, Limited —IP... ..... ..IP 'I� ......_...1�_............. ._ .._._.. -- -- Limited ._. iGroup Residential . ..F..- .... - -� .... ........... (Residential Care, Limited P 1J .._....... _....... .._. Residential Care, General FEP I FEP FEP __.,._........_.._.. _....., ..... _ _.. . 1.... .. __.._ ...... .. _. Single- family Residential rP Ip -rp— I F- -1(D), (E) (M) Multifamily Residential - -- P D Two - Family Residential - -- j IP....._...._.....: IP .....___._.....:I�....__...... I(D) .. 5 ;PUBLIC AND SEMI - PUBLIC[ I ...... �I�A! meteries ubs and Lodges L -2 ---- ..._.__._....._i.... ...__._... 1......- - - -'.. - - - -- —._. 'Convalescent Facilities UP UP U�P — UP t... jDay_Care, General Government Offices UP UP UP UP�� VPark and Recreation. UP UP Facilities UP UP UP Public Safety Facilities UP - [UP UP - UP - UP _.._.- _....i... -._. Religious Assembly UP (UP UP _.......... OF ...........: UP._._.. Schools, Public and Private P_ UP jUtilities Major jUP U� U I... UP UP lUtilittes, Minor IP... IP Fp— [COMMERCIAL USES ( —� F '(A). lHorticufture, Limited IP - -- � - -- t -- - - — —; - — ;Nurseries PD/ -- - - B , C) � ) hicle /Equipment Sales andF_7 ices �. � ................. �... _ _ .. _._. _ 1 - comm ercial Parking; [Facility - -- Lt^ 3 -.I... .......,._I. L -3 Lf 3 ^- L -3 'Visitor Accommodations -Bed and Breakfast Inns I—j --- - -- tUP ... UP (F) -SRO Residential Hotels ... . - - -- _ ............:1..... -..... - -- UP ..... ....---.._.......- ;AGRICULTURAL AND EXTRACTIVE USES � � A(B)(C) ,Animal husbandry PD/ (G) ICrop Production Mining and Processing L- 4........ ..- LL 4 .. JL-4 iL -4 L 4 ............... (H)_..... _. I . ...i. �I ...... ... ..........._ ..... _— __._...... (A), (B), (C) 'ACCESSORY USES - F ,Accessory Structures andP /U ;Uses !P /U P /UP —iP /U i.... . P /UP (I) PORARY USES (A), (B), C) Circuses and Carnivals 1P —'P P P I P I(K) 9 mercial Filming, Limited ilp anal Property Sales uP Estate Offices.,IL -5 -- --- .._..... IT .... .... ... _._.._ ��I�_...._ [�_ -5 L -5 IL -5 IL- Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L -3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L-4: See Chapter 20.81, Oil Wells. L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -1 Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short term lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short term lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (F): See Section 20.60.110, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: 1. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. b. Other Large Animals. Other large animals, including goats, sheep, pigs and cows, may be kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet or more and the number shall not exceed two adult animals of any one species. C. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 7.08 of the Municipal Code. 7 • u 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and • exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. 4. Control. a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of the owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure. (H): See Chapter 20.81, Oil Wells. (1): See Section 20.60.100, Home Occupations in Residential Districts. (J): See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K): Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code. (L): See Section 20.60.120, Personal Property Sales in Residential Districts. (M): See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued in any case where a use • permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terms of this code unless and until such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit has been granted by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit granted. SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. SECTION 8. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically • assigned to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. ' 1 The Planning Commission shall have the authority to review an application for a Federal I Exception. The City Council shall have final decision - making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits filed concurrently • with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision. After the conclusion of the hearing on any application for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit, the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirty -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision. Upon the rendering of a decision on a use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site. SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an • application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit . Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. Exception Permit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for such a Federal Exception Permit if, and to the extent, required by state or federal law. I • b. Nonresidential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of • property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. A description of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; • 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4. A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an administrative decision. E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.035 Required Findings. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A. For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of • this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 10 2. That the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the • general plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That. because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning • district; 4. The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal Exception PermitsZ. 1. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped - related. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the living group residing in the Dwelling functions as a Single Housekeeping Unit. as evideRGed by faete;s inelddin9, butrset— limit9d + lank of #apisieRGE?y ;raea9 ils members. FeF the- pa:pases ef FedeFal her than 2 A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the permit and application process necessary to obtain a `reasonable accommodation" as that term is used in the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments (FHAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA. The application for a Federal • Exception Permit shall be approved unless the evidence in the administrative record establishes one of the findings for denial. Federal Exemption Permits are subject to the enforcement 11 the R 4 ZGne, a W& ^-nf tMRSienGey shall FRe?^ the Yh�euseheld de Rot • 30 The Federal Exception Permit neither requires a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program affected by the Federal Exception Permit nor imposes an undue financial or administrative burden on the City which creates an undue hardship on the City. To the extent authorized by law, the factors the _Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal may consider the following in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: (i) whether vehicular traffic congestion in the neighborhood would be increased to an extent that would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; (ii) whether the nature of vehicular traffic, such as the frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential • uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11. Section 20.91.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being or will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off - street parking facilities as determined in each case. The following conditions shall be imposed upon the issuance of any Federal Exemption Permit: 1. The permittee shall limit overnight occupancy of the dwellin units(s) to no more than the number of occupants permitted by the Provisions of Title 15 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code. • 2. The permittee shall use best efforts to insure that the occupants do not create unreasonable noise or disturbances, engage in disorderly conduct, or violate provisions of this Code or 12 any law pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol, or the use of illegal drugs. 3. The permittee shall, upon notification that occupants and /or • quests have created unreasonable noise or disturbances, engaged in disorderly conduct or committed violations of this Code or law Pertaining to noise, disorderly conduct, the consumption of alcohol or the use of illegal drugs, promptly use best efforts to prevent a recurrence of such conduct. 4. The permittee shall use best efforts to insure compliance with all the provisions of Title 6 of the Municipal Code (garbage, refuse and cuttings). 5. The permittee shall post, in a cons icuous place within the dwelling. a copy of this permit and /or the operational rules specified in this Section. SECTION 12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall • not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.95, the permit shall not become effective unless and until a decision granting the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the City Council. SECTION 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of approval or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval unless: 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or • 13 2. - A building permit has been issued and construction • has commenced; or 3. A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or 4. The use is established; or 5. A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin until the effective date of approval of the coastal permit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be made in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date. C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection • therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation. Procedures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. • B. New Applications. If an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no 14 new application for the same, or substantially the same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed • within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless the denial is made without prejudice. SECTION 15. Severability . If any provision or clause of this Chapter or the application thereof is held unconstitutional or otherwise invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions, clauses or applications of this Chapter which can be implemented without the invalid provision, clause or application, it being hereby expressly hereby declared that this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase hereof would have been prepared, proposed, approved, adopted, sentences SECTION 16: The Mayor shall sign and the City Clerk shall attest to the passage of this ordinance. The City Clerk shall cause the same to be published once in the official newspaper of the City, and it shall be effective thirty (30) days after its adoption. SECTION 17: This ordinance was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Newport Beach, held on the _ day of 2004, and adopted on • the _ day of 2004, by the following vote, to wit: AYES, COUNCILMEMBERS NOES, COUNCILMEMBERS ABSENT COUNCILMEMBERS MAYOR ATTEST: 15 • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robert Burnham, City Attorney; 644 -3131, rb urn ham (a(�city.newport- bea ch. ca. us SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment/Recovery Facilities CDt9NM AGENDA NO is 8"il� Agenda Item No. 4 July 27, 2004 ISSUE: Should the City Council adopt amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) pertaining to recovery facilities that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional law? RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends the City Council adopt the proposed amendments to the Zoning Code that are attached as Exhibit A. BACKGROUND: On February 24. 2004, the City Council, after conducting two study sessions on the topic, initiated amendments to the Zoning Code "pertaining to recovery is facilities in residential districts." The Planning Commission conducted noticed public hearings on the proposed amendments on May 20, 2004 and June 17, 2004. On June 17, 2004, the Planning Commission (4 ayes, 2 nays and one absent) voted to approve an ordinance identical to Exhibit A with the exception of the modification discussed below. • On July 13, 2004, the City Council conducted a noticed public hearing on the proposed amendments. The City Council introduced the proposed amendments with one modification pertaining to the findings for a Federal Exception Permit and that modification is reflected in Exhibit A. We have attached a copy of an opinion from Dr. Michael Gales (Exhibit B), a specialist in the field of chemical dependency treatment, "a residential capacity of six or fewer constitutes a sufficient number of participants to achieve the stated goals of a sober living home." This opinion provides a factual basis for the proposed amendments. ENVIRONMENTAL: The proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 of the CEQA Guidelines (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations). Submito6d by: Burnham, City Attorney DRAFT ORDINANCE NO._ • AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.10.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the City has adopted regulations on different types of group living arrangements at various times throughout the City's history; and WHEREAS, the existing regulations on group living are confusing and in need of refinement; and WHEREAS, in light of the Fair Housing Act Amendments, 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq. (the "Act "), the City desires to codify its process for providing Federal Exception Permits when appropriate under the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: SECTION 1. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport • Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 yard radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen/food service area for the occupants of the other buildings. "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, single - family" means a building containing one dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The term "Family" shall include residential care, limited facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally • 2611066751-0059 512369.01 a 7( ! e67{BM4l EXHIBIT • disordered or otherwise handicapped persons, but no other living group not living together as a single housekeeping unit. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are a non- transient, interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit, including the joint use of common areas and sharing household activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non- residential, non - medical care and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty -four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group residential" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. This classification includes boarding houses, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, and private residential clubs, but excludes Residential • Care- Limited, Residential Care - General, and residential hotels (see Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section 20.05.050(EE)(4)). "Residential Care - Limited" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or • assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. 261/066751 -0059 1 512369.01 2a(17 01/ 4a0T/BA�04 -2- "Single- Family Residential" means buildings containing one • dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. "Two- Family Residential" means buildings containing two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. SECTION 3. The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non- medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. SECTION 4. Subsection H of Section 20. 10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code • is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H. Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows: Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District. Provides areas for single- family residential and light farming uses. Single- Family Residential (R -1) District. This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide for a stable, social neighborhood for single- family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides areas for single - family and two family residential land uses with the total gross floor area of all buildings limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. Two Family Residential (R -2) District. Provides areas for single- family and two family residential land uses. • 2611066751 -0059 -3 - 1 512369.01 g9]N4aWM9/04 • Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single- family, two - family, and multiple family residential land uses. SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the land uses defined in Chapter 20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and includes special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter "P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "PD/U" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "P/UP" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when located on the site of a conditional use. The letters RA designates use classifications for which a Federal Exception Permit must first be obtained pursuant to Chapter 20.91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under • the heading. Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations P = Permitted UP = Use permit PD/U = Use permit issued by the Planning Director L = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) FEP = Federal Exception Permit = Not Permitted R -A R -1 R -1.5 R -2 ff��]Additional Regulations RESIDENTIAL_ Day -Care, Limited _ P Group Residential` I ����F------�`�l -- Residential Cate, Limited ®E� _F__ =E F' _ Residential Care, General _ C —�--� FEP FF.P _ J FEP _ JL . .......... J Single - family ResidentialP P P P P D Multifamily Residential Residential 0-Family 261/066751 -0059 512369.01 &QZ LQ4e080W04 4- PUBLIC AND SEMI-PUBLIC F (A), (B), (C) Cemeteries .. . L -1 i L -1 L -1 L -1 _._ — - - -- -- 2611066751-0059 -5- 512369.01 a 721 �merclalFilmmg Llmlted �� 1� P t_` P �t(K�_ - -- �� ��� onal Property Sales �lP I` (�P . ...._ �P _ ..l` .... 1���! ._ . 1 eliports, Temporary L -5 L -5 (J) I.Real Estate Offices, Temporary LL -5 L -5 L� -5 L -5 L -5 ( (B) Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L -3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L-4: See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -1 Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short term lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short term lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. • (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (F): See Section 20.60.110, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: 1. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. b. Other Large Animals. Other large animals, including goats, sheep, pigs and cows, may be kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet or more and the number shall not exceed two adult animals of any one species. C. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six, Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 7.08 of the Municipal Code. 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. • 4. Control. 261/066751 -0059 512369.01 IQLIZ &14 4 /09AG4 -6- a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of the owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure. (H): See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. (1): See Section 20.60.100, Home Occupations in Residential Districts. (J): See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K): Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code. (L): See Section 20.60.120, Personal Property Sales in Residential Districts. (M): See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued in any case where a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terms of this code unless and until such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit has been granted by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the use permit, • variance or Federal Exception Permit granted. SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. SECTION 8. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for • 261/066751-0059 1 512 369.01 gQ%[L16- 4ag7&984 -7- • an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically assigned to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. 1 Exception. The City Council shall have final decision- making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits filed concurrently with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision. After the conclusion of the hearing on any application for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit, the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirty -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision. Upon the rendering of a decision on a is use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site. SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit . Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. 1 The Planning Commission shall have the ability to review an application for a Federal • Exception Permit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for such a Federal Exception Permit when otherwise required by state or federal law. 261/066151 -0059 1 512369.01 13Q,'fULQj. i09/Q4 -g- C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an • administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. b. Nonresidential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two • conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. A description of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4. A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an • administrative decision. 261/066751-0059 -9- 512369.01 JQ7aLJ!fiOWQ9*4 • E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.035 Required Findings. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A. For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 2. That the proposed location of the use permit and the • proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; • 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 261/066751 -0059 1 512769.01 AQ7(�(L4a0449*4 -10- 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special • privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 4. The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal Exception PermitS2. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped- related. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the living group residing in the Dwelling functions as a Single Housekeeping Unit t among its tnembe ,,r the pw-- ese.. of Federal i✓icc2pt19AT°5- lfF-other- .. ..., R 1 Zone, 3 l.:.,...,. tfanSivnee7 shall mean the hauseheld does fiat ehange here than `-- 00its • 3. The Federal Exception Permit neither requires a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program affected by the Federal Exception Permit nor imposes an undue financial or administrative burden on the City which creates an undue hardship on the City. To the extent authorized by law, the factors the Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal may consider the following in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: (i) whether vehicular traffic congestion in the neighborhood would be increased to an extent that would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; 2 A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the permit and application process necessary to obtain a "reasonable accommodation" as that term is used in the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments (FHAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA. The application for a Federal Exception Permit shall be approved unless the evidence in the administrative record establishes • one of the findings for denial. 261M6751-0059 1 5125f9.01 0 f 7109104 -11- • (ii) whether the nature of vehicular traffic, such as the frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11. Section 20.91.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case maybe, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being or • will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off - street parking facilities as determined in each case. SECTION 12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.95, the permit shall not become effective unless and until a decision granting the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the City Council. SECTION 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit • granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire 761/066751-0059 512369.01 07/21/04e0N09/0a -12- within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of approval or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval • unless: 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or 2. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced; or 3. A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or 4. The use is established; or A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin until the effective date of approval of the coastal permit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be made in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the expiration date. • C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation. Procedures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement • 261/066751-0059 1 512369.01 19RILIAIROWOW94 -13- • for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. • • B. New Applications. If an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no new application for the same, or substantially the same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless the denial is made without prejudice. 261066751 -0059 1 512169.01 aUg /QgeBT/B9/B4 -14- iYI -LI -VY II.LVGIII IIVIII I�VIN1 Y IVVIILI��VV! i oIdfarb(a.rutan.com Mr. Bob Burnham City Attorney City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca. 926663 11Y'+Y V -]ui+ 1 -]II ! ul /VL f -ViV Permit me to summarize my credentials in the field of chemical dependency treatment. I have been in the private practice of psychiatry and chemical dependency for 25 years. My residency in psychiatry at the UCLA - Brentwood VA included one year of family oriented treatment of chemical dependency as well as intensive exposure to the treatment of individual patients in recovery. Following the residency I served for three years as Director of the outpatient Combined Alcohol and Drug Recovery Program at the Brentwood VA Medical Center. In 19851 developed and initiated the first Dual Diagnosis treatment program in Los Angeles at the CPC Westwood Hospital in West Los Angeles. All of these treatment venues were carefully integrated with Twelve Step activities. In the ensuing years I have actively treated alcohol and drug dependent patients in a range of treatment settings, which includes treating physicians in coordination with the Diversion Program of the Medical Board of California. I have been asked to opine in the matter of how many participants are necessary for the effective operation of a residential sober living home. To clarify terminology, I define a sober living home as a non - service providing residential living facility that is not under the auspices of a state or municipal licensing agency. Participation in a sober living milieu is on a voluntary basis for the expressed purpose of supporting the common goal of maintaining sobriety /abstinence from addictive substances. Participants mutually reinforce the values and behaviors pertinent to recovery from addiction. There are no professional services provided in sober living homes, which rely on the motivation of the individuals and the group for self - improvement. In my opinion, a residential capacity of six or fewer constitutes a sufficient number of participants to achieve the stated goals of a sober living home. For many recovering individuals a quieter environment with a smaller number of participants is the optimal recovery setting. When contact with larger numbers of people in recovery is desirable, this can easily be accomplished by transportation to large group meetings. As a corollary to this opinion it would be reasonable policy to require a special application to the city explaining why seven or more people are necessary for a functional program. Michael Gales MD EXHIBIT B I • • CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT TO: MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL FROM: Robert Burnham, City Attorney 644 -3131, rburnham(a)city.newport- beach.ca.us SUBJECT: Zoning Amendment/Recovery Facilities ISSUE: COUNCIL AGENDA 22 O Agenda Item No. 19 July 13, 2004 Should the City Council introduce, and pass to second reading and adoption, amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional law related to the regulation of recovery facilities? RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council introduce and pass to second reading the • proposed amendments to the Zoning Code. BACKGROUND: On February 24, 2004, the City Council initiated amendments to the Zoning Code "pertaining to recovery facilities in residential districts." On May 20, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted a noticed public hearing relative to proposed amendments to various provisions of the Zoning Code. The Planning Commission held a second hearing on June 17, 2004. The Planning Commission (4 ayes, 2 nays and one absent) voted to approve the Exhibit A with the understanding that the definition of campus be revised to specify three or more structures located within a radius of 300 yards. For purposes of this memo, we are using the term "recovery facilities" to mean dwelling units that house persons who are "abstinent in recovery" or who suffer from a disorder or other condition that would constitute a "handicap" under Federal or State law. Based on research conducted to date, special counsel and staff believe the following is an accurate summary of the statutory and decisional law that is most relevant to the regulation of recovery facilities: 1. State law requires the City to treat State - licensed drug or alcohol treatment facilities serving six or fewer occupants as single family residential uses. State law also preempts local ordinances imposing special building, fire safety, fee or permit requirements on State - licensed drug or alcohol treatment facilities serving six or fewer • occupants. According to State law, the number of occupants does not include the State licensee, members of the licensee's family, or persons employed at the facility. 2. The Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 (FHAA) prevents the City's from adopting or enforcing zoning ordinances that impact recovery facilities for handicapped individuals differently than non - handicapped residential uses in the same zone unless the City: (a) can prove the ordinance is necessary to further a legitimate governmental interest; and (b) reasonably accommodates handicapped individuals /uses by waiving enforcement unless we can prove that a waiver would impose an undue burden on the City and undermine the basic purpose of the ordinance. 3. The FHAA and related case law prohibits the City from, among other things, establishing a "one person per bedroom room" requirement for recovery facilities, imposing distance requirements between recovery facilities, and or preventing "for - profit" entities from establishing or operating recovery facilities. 4. The provisions of State law relative to the treatment of State - licensed recovery facilities serving six or fewer occupants and the provisions of the FHAA that prohibit discrimination combine to prevent the City from treating unlicensed recovery facilities differently than State - licensed recovery facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 20, 2004 At the Planning Commission meeting on May 20th, staff and special counsel presented • the proposed Zoning Code amendments that were drafted in an effort to preserve the unique character of our diverse residential neighborhood in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory and decisional law. The amendments presented on May 20, 2004 can be summarized as follows: 1. Various definitions — including "single family dwelling" and "family" — were modified and the term "single housekeeping unit" has been added. (20.03.030) 2. Certain "Residential Use Classifications" were modified to more closely confomn to law and the term "Residential Care, General" was added. (20.05.030) 3. A "Reasonable Accommodation" process was added to provide a mechanism for persons to request, and for the City to evaluate and approve when appropriate, a "Reasonable Accommodation." (Section 20.91.020) 4. The matrix of permitted land uses in Residential Districts was been modified to permit "Residential Care, Limited" (recovery facilities with six or fewer occupants per dwelling unit) in all Districts. The matrix was also modified to prohibit Residential Care, General" in R -1 and R -A zones (20.10.020) and require a "Reasonable Accommodation" for "Residential Care, General" (recovery facilities with seven or more occupants per dwelling unit) uses in all other residential zones. • During the public hearing on May 20', members of the Planning Commission and the • public commented on, and asked staff and special counsel to evaluate, a number of issues. The issues included: (a) why special counsel and staff were proposing amendments that allow recovery facilities with seven or more occupants per dwelling unit in the R1.5 and R -2 zones with a reasonable accommodation; (b) the extent of the City's ability to consider parcel size as a factor in the zones in which recovery facilities are located and /or the reasonable accommodation determination; (c) the factors — including impact on the neighborhood - the City could or should consider in granting a reasonable accommodation; (d) the extent of the City's ability to adopt and apply special parking standards to recovery facilities; (e) whether the Planning Director or the Planning Commission should make the initial determination on a reasonable accommodation; (e) the City's ability, if any, to establish limits on the number of recovery facilities in a particular neighborhood or geographic area; and (0 the manner in which neighboring communities are dealing with recovery facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 17, 2004 On June 17, 2004, staff and special counsel presented the Planning Commission with a revised ordinance that responded, where possible, to issues raised during the May 201° meeting. The major changes to the ordinance presented on May 201n were: (a) the addition of a definition of campus to mean three or more buildings being used together for a common purpose where one of the buildings provides a service for the users of all buildings; (b) the addition of a "Federal Exception Permit" (FEP) requirement for • recovery facilities in R -1.5, R -2 and MFR zones and delineation of some of the factors that the Planning Commission could consider in deciding whether to grant or deny an FEP; and (c) designating the Planning Commission — rather than the Planning Director - as the initial decision maker on an application for an FEP. DISCUSSION The proposed ordinance (Exhibit A) conforms to the recommendation of the Planning Commission represents what staff and special counsel believe is the most appropriate vehicle to reconcile State and Federal restrictions on our ability to regulate recovery facilities with the desire of the City Council to preserve the unique character of different residential neighborhoods. Newport Beach is home to residential areas — such as the R -1.5 and R -2 zones near the beach and bay - that have a relatively high percentage of renters and a sizeable number of dwelling units that are offered as vacation rentals during the summer and to college students during the winter. These R -1.5 and R -2 zones are characterized by relatively small lots and, based on anecdotal evidence, relatively high densities. For these reasons, the proposed ordinance prohibits recovery facilities in R -1 zones (or the equivalent) and requires recovery facilities serving 7 or more occupants in the R 1 -5 and R -2 zones to obtain a Federal Exception Permit. • Members of the Planning Commission and those who testified at the two public hearings suggested various amendments that would establish special development standards for recovery facilities. Staff and special counsel are aware of no hard • evidence to support a finding that recovery facilities — other than situations involving a "campus" - have a greater impact on parking than other residential uses. However, we have evidence that suggests the concentration of recovery facilities in an area can increase the volume of traffic and the number of large commercial vehicles entering and leaving the area — so we have incorporated those considerations into the Federal Exception Permit process. We have previously offered the opinion, based on legal research, that the City does not have the authority to regulate the number of recovery facilities in a given area or require that recovery facilities be separated by a specific distance. Finally, special counsel has prepared a matrix of the recovery facility regulations adopted by neighboring jurisdictions (Exhibit B). The proposed ordinance — which would amend provisions of the Zoning Code — does not address issues related to licenses that recovery facilities might be required to obtain under other provisions of the Municipal Code or the application of other provisions that regulate the conduct of people or require permits of certain land uses. This office and special counsel will be reviewing those issues separately and will provide the City Council with an analysis sometime in the near future. The proposed amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of the CEQA Guidelines. Su itted by: Su /Robert Burnham, City Attorney • • • DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.10.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the City has adopted regulations on different types of group living arrangements at various times throughout the City's history; and WHEREAS, the existing regulations on group living are confusing and in need of refinement; and WHEREAS, in light of the Fair Housing Act Amendments, 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq. (the "Act "), the City desires to codify its process for providing Federal Exception Permits when appropriate under the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: • SECTION 1. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 yard radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen/food service area for the occupants of the other buildings. "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, single- family" means a building containing one dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The term "Family" shall include residential care, limited facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally • 261/066751 -0059 512369.01 a07/06/04 EXHIBIT disordered or otherwise handicapped persons, but no other living group not living together as a single housekeeping unit. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are a non - transient, interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit, including the joint use of common areas and sharing household activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non - residential, non - medical care and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty -four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group residential" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit. This classification includes boarding houses, dormitories, fraternities, sororities, and private residential clubs, but excludes Residential Care- Limited, Residential Care - General, and residential hotels (see • Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section 20.05.050(EE)(4)), "Residential Care - Limited" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. • 261/066751 -0059 512369.01 .07!06/01 -2- "Single- Family Residential" means buildings containing one • dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. "Two- Family Residential" means buildings containing two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. SECTION 3. The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. • SECTION 4. Subsection H of Section 20.10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H. Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows: Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District. Provides areas for single- family residential and light farming uses. Single - Family Residential (R -1) District. This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide for a stable, social neighborhood for single- family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides areas for single- family and two family residential land uses with the total gross floor area of all buildings limited to a maximum floor area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. Two Family Residential (R -2) District. Provides areas for • single - family and two family residential land uses. 26M66751 -0059 512369.01 07/06/04 -3- Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single- family, two - family, and multiple family residential land uses. • SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the land uses defined in Chapter 20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and includes special requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter "P" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter "L" designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "PD/U" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters "P/UP" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when located on the site of a conditional use. The letters RA designates use classifications for which a Federal Exception Permit must first be obtained pursuant to Chapter 20.91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule. Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. • Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations v I P = Permitted UP = Use permit PDIU = Use permit issued by the Planning Director L = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) i FEP = Federal Exception Permit j ' - -- = Not Permitted I fl RR- -A RR -1 R -1.5 (1111 -2 MFR `Additional II JI__— Regulations _ _.._..__ �___ RESIDENTIAL �L ice_..._ J (A), (B), (C) Day -Care, Limited _IEE— 0 lip _ -__ —J� ,Group Residential ...... .. !.......-- i -- ......_! �— _.__... �.._...... �I_._.._ ............ ...II-:-......_....- ..':;.:. -._ _...._...._'� __.._ � Residential Care, Limited LP— '�—° -- I Residential Care, General ��� --I FEP P �� P-- FEP FEP P P D (E) (M) Single- family Residential P Multifamily Residential - -- ! - -- I - -- I ___ p (D) Two- Family Residential P P (D) _ _.....- -- 2611066751 -0059 $12769.01 47106V -4- 'BLIC AND SEMI- PUBL!jC[_____ eteries - -� L -I L -I L -I LEI Clubs and Lodges �0 L -2 L -2 I F L_2 _IF Convalescent Facilities �� ���® Day -Care, General — Government Offices —II = E UP UP Hospitals����r�� Park and Recreation Facilities PP= 1 UP Public Safety Facilities Religious Assembly PT— im� UP 0 Schools, Public and Private jl ��I"r �l✓��J ; Utilities, Major ; UP UP UP UP f UP [Utilities, Minor �P .._— ._____�Irlr __JI`_._ —� M CODIERCIAL USES��� (A), (B), (C)_ Horticulture, Limited INurseries -hicle /Equipment Sales and ices ! onlmercial Parking Facility P PD/ _ :I - ..._...- ..._....- ....�� �� - -- _._.. _....._.._.. __...__._.I Visitor Accommodations -Bed and Breakfast Inns r�— SRO Residential Hotels _ I�� - - - -- AGRICULTURAL AND I EXTRACTIVE USES— Animal husbandry Crop Production PD/ i (A), (B), (C) Mining and Processing (A), (B), (C) 1 ACCESSORY USES 1 Accessory Structures and Uses IP/lJP ; i P/UP P/lJP _ P/UP— _ —, TEDIPORARY USES �.. -...1 ...1..._.J,I_... uses and Carnivals IP - -P .._.__._._!I._... LJ 2611066751.0059 512369.01 a07106104 -5- ng, Limited IIP 11P li P 11 P 11 P Sales Estate Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit required. L-3: Public or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L -4: See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses. (C): See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting. (D): With the exception of uses in the R -h Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short term lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of. 1. A business license pursuant to Chapter 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short tern lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. (E): See Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. • (F): See Section 20.60.110, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: h. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept for each ten thousand (10,000) square feel of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. b. Other Large Animals. Outer large animals, including goals, sheep, pigs and cows, may be kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feel or more and the number shall not exceed two adult animals of any one species. C. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 7.06 of the Municipal Code. 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of llree months. 4. Control. • 261 N667560059 $12369.01 a07106/0e -6- a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to Oun at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of e owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confined, at all times within a suitable enclosure. (H): See Chapter 20.81, Oil Wells. (I): See Section 20.60.100, Home Occupations in Residential Districts. (J): See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K): Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Code. (L): See Section 20.60.120, Personal Property Sales in Residential Districts. (M): See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. No building permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued in any case where a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terns of this code unless and until such use pennit, variance or Federal Exception Pennit has been granted by the Planning Director or the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then • only in accordance with the terns and conditions of the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit granted. • SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed in a manner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. SECTION S. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for 26M66751 -0059 512369.01 47/06/04 -7- an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically assigned to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. • Exception. The City Council shall have final decision - making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits filed concurrently with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision. After the conclusion of the hearing on any application for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit, the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirty -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision. Upon the rendering of a decision on a use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall • be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site. SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an application for a use pen-nit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit . Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. The Planning Comm-nission Direeter-shall have the ability to review an application for a Federal Exception Pen-nit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for such a reasonable aeeemmodatie Federal Exception Permit when otherwise • required by state or federal law. 1611066751.0059 $12369.01 OM6N4 -8- C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an • administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. b. Nonresidential Districts. Al least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. • 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall be published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. A description of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4. A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an • administrative decision. 2611066751 -0059 512769.01 W7/06/04 -9- E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue • the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.035 Required Findings. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A. For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 2.. That the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan and the purpose of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to • the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; E 261/066751.0059 $12369.01 a07106104 -10- 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 4. The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal Exception Permits 2. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped- related. 2. The applicant has demonstrated that the living group residing in the Dwelling functions as a Single Housekeeping Unit as evidenced by factors including, but not limited to a lack of transiencey among its members. For the purposes of Federal Exception Permits in other than the R -1 Zone, a lack of transiencey • shall mean the household does not change more than 50% of its members in any given calendar year. 3. The Federal Exception Permit neither requires a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program affected by the Federal Exception Permit nor imposes an undue financial or administrative burden on the City which creates an undue hardship on the City. To the extent authorized by law, the factors the Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal may consider the following in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: (i) whether vehicular traffic congestion in the neighborhood would be increased to an extent that would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; Z A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the hermit and application process necessary to obtain a "reasonable accommodation' as that term is used in the Federal Fair Housing Act Amendments (FHAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA The application for a Federal • Exception Permit shall be approved unless the evidence in the administrative record establishes one of the findings for denial. 161(066751 -0059 512369.01 a07/06/04 (ii) whether the nature of vehicular traffic, such as the } frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be f altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11. Section 20.91.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such conditions are being or will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off- street parking facilities as determined in each case. • SECTION 12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such decision under the provisions of Chapter 20.95, the permit shall not become effective unless and until a decision granting the use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the City Council. SECTION 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire • 2611066751 -0059 512369.01 a07106104 -12- within twenty -four (24) months from the effective date of approval • or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval unless: 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or 2. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced; or 3. A certificate of occupancy has been issued; or 4. The use is established; or 5. A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin until the effective date of approval of the coastal pennit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be made in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the • expiration date. C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terns of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation. Procedures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a • new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement 2611066751.0059 512369.01 a07106104 -13- for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original approval. B. New Applications. If an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no new application for the same, or substantially the same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless the denial is made without prejudice. • • 261/066751 -0059 512769.01 a07/06/04 -14- 0 MEMORANDUM TO: Bob Burnham, City Attorney, City of Newport Beach FROM: Jeffrey A. Goldfarb DATE: July 6, 2004 FILE NO.: 066751 -0059 RE: Nearby Cities' Mechanism for Regulating Sober Living Environments You have asked that we review the mechanism that adjoining cities use for the regulation of sober living facilities. We have reviewed the Municipal codes for the Cities of Costa Mesa, Irvine and Laguna Beach. Below is a discussion of each city's regulatory approach. City of Irvine The City of Irvine defines a sober living facility "as any house, institution, hotel or similar place that provides room and board, or rooms only, and operates as a drug and alcohol • free residential facility." (Irvine Zoning Ord. § 1 -2 -1.) Irvine permits sober living facilities in all residential zones with the exception of the "estate density residential zone" (one house per acre) without regard to the number of persons the facility serves and without regard to whether the residents are living together as a single housekeeping unit. (Irvine Municipal Code § 3 -3 -1.) Irvine also includes regulates a category of uses entitled "Residential Care facilities," (Irvine Zoning Ord. § 1 -2 -1.) which are defined as "any family home, group care facility or similar facility providing 24 -hour non - medical services, supervisions or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. Residential Care facilities includes shelters, board and care facilities, half way houses, wards of the juvenal court and the like and excludes Sober living facilities." (Id.) The Irvine Zoning Ordinance allows Residential Care facilities in all residential zones with a Conditional Use Pen nit. (Irvine Municipal Code § 3 -3 -1.) Because Residential Care facilities expressly exclude all "Sober Living Facilities," the Irvine Zoning Ordinance would allow all drug and alcohol free group living facilities, in every residential zoned as a matter of right without regard to number of residents. II. City of Costa Mesa Costa Mesa includes sober living facilities within the definition of residential care facilities (which are state licensed facilities), and residential service facilities (which are not state licensed facilities). Residential Care and Service facilities serving 6 or fewer are permitted in all of the city's residential zones. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) Residential Care and Service facilities serving 7 or more are prohibited in the City's R -1 zone, and conditionally permitted in all other residential zones of the City. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) The • City Code also contains a special category of Residential Care and Service facilities referred to 261 /06675 1-0059 507735.01 a06/16/04 EXHIBIT Bob Burnham, City Attorney, City of Newport Beach : July 6, 2004 • Page 2 as a "Referral Facility." A Referral Facility is a Residential Care or Residential Service facility where one or more of the person's residency in the facility is pursuant to a court order or directive from an agency in the criminal justice system. The category does not, however, include state license facilities containing 6 or fewer persons. Referral Facilities are prohibited in the City's R -1 zone and permitted by conditional use permit in all of the City's other residential zones. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) 111. City of Laguna Beach The City of Laguna Beach does not expressly regulate sober living homes, residential treatment facilities or other group homes. The city does, however, limit residency to "families," defined as "an individual or two or more persons related by flood, marriage or adoption, living together or a group of not more than six persons (excluding servants) not all of whom are related by blood, marriage or adoption but all of them are living together as a single housekeeping unit within a dwelling so that all persons within the unit maintain free access to all living spaces within the dwelling. (Laguna Beach Municipal Code § 25.08.012.) Under state law, all residential care facilities and alcohol rehabilitation facilities serving 6 or fewer persons would therefore be permitted in all the City's residential zones. It is unclear how the City regulates • residential care facilities, group homes or alcohol recovery facilities serving 7 or more. • 2611066751 -0059 507735.01 a06116/04 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 u • • CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN �wh0 LAW OFFICES OF FACSIMILE DANIEL C. CARLTON (949)752 -2141 2600 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 1120 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 July 12, 2004 HAND DELIVERED City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 PAGE 02 TELEPHONE (949).757 -0707 Legal A"letant Heather Dorris Re: July 13, 2004 Hearing Agenda Item 19 Proposed Zoning AmendmentlRecovery Facilities City of Newport Beach Planning Commission Staff Report, dated July 13, 2004, in re Agenda Item No. 19 Dear Mayor Ridgeway and City Council Members: This will confirm that this office represents Narconon Southern California. Our client received on July. 9, 2004 a copy of the latest Planning Commission Staff Report summary with recommendation regarding the proposed zoning 'amendments for recovery facilities for the Hearing scheduled for July 13, 2004 as Agenda Item No. 19 with Exhibits A (the proposed ordinance amendment) and Exhibit B (Memorandum dated July 6, 2004), A copy is attached for your review. Although we have not had the opportunity to study the proposed amendments, a cursory review raises the following issues of concern: 1. We note that the newly coined term "federal exception permit' does not exist under state and federal laws. It appears that the use of this term is an attempt to circumvent applicable laws. 2. The amendment attempts to create a new category of definitions, delineating the difference between Residential Care, General and Multi- Family Residential. The amendment attempts to place additional burdens on an applicant for Residential Care, General under MFR. Once again, to the extent that these proposed changes discriminate against recovery facilities, they are oppressive and burdensome and in violation of state and federal laws. 3. In order to obtain a reasonable accommodation, apparently an Applicant must prove that there Is a lack of transiency among its members. This is defined in dl/ IJ /2yb4 L�J: -JJ 44'±/522141 City Council City of Newport July 12, 2004 Page 2 . UKL I N nK I L KNrL L.MN PAUL b3 section 10 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code 20.91.0356.2 as "a lack of transiency has meant that the household does not change more than 50% of its members in any calendar year." . We question how this can be justified in light of state and federal laws regarding discriminatory practices against recovery facilities. Is the City going to apply this definition also to residential rental properties? 4. The Amendment requires a finding that traffic congestion or the nature of vehicular traffic would not be altered to violate any municipal code. We understand that a hotel is being proposed on the peninsula. It seems obvious that a recovery facility would generate far less traffic and congestion (and transients) than would a hotel. Will the same standards apply? 5. State and federal laws are quite clear that the City must provide reasonable accommodations to recovery facilities in. order to avoid discrimination. As long as the final ordinance is in line with state and federal laws, our client will support It. Thank you for your consideration in addressing these issues. Respectfully, DANIEL C. CARLTON 7 D DCC:td cc: Jon Stearman, DLA Narconcon Southern California (via facsimile) Robert Burnham, Newport Beach City Attorney (via facsimile) Jeffrey A. Goldfarb, Special Counsel to City of Newport Beach (via facsimile) • E bj /1D /zhna N9:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN FAGE 04 • TO: FROM: SUBJECT ISSUE: CITY OF NEWPORT BEACH PLANNING COMMISSION. STAFF REPORT MAYOR & MEMBERS OF THE CITY COUNCIL Robert Burnham, City Attorney 6443131, rburnham(Lbci .newport- bgach.ca.us Zoning AmendmentlRecovery Facilities Agenda Item No. 19 July 13, 2004 Should the City Council Introduce, and pass to second reading and adoption, amendments to the Zoning Code (Exhibit A) that are intended to preserve the character of residential neighborhoods in a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory/decisional I.aw.related to the.regulation of recovery.facilities7 RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that. the. City Council introduce and pass to second reading the • proposed amendments to the Zoning Code. BACKGROUND: On February 24. 2004, the City Council Initiated amendments to the Zoning Code 'pertaining to recovery facilities in. residential districts." On May 20, 2004, the Planning Commission conducted.a noticed public hearing relative to, proposed amendments to various provisions of the Zoning Code. The Planning Commission held a second hearing on June 17,'2004. The Planning Commission (4 ayes, 2 nays and one absent) voted to approve the Exhibit A with the understanding that the definition of. campus be revised to. specify three, or more structures located within a,radius of, 300 yards. For purposes of this memo, we are using the term "recovery facilities" to mean dwelling units that house persons who are 'abstinent in recovery` or who. suffer from a .disorder or other condition that would constitute a "handicap" under Federal or State taw. Based on research conducted to date, special counsel and staff believe the following is an accurate summary of the statutory and decisional law that is most relevant to the regulation of recovery facilities: 1. State law requires the City to treat State- licensed drug or alcohol treatment facilities serving six or fewer occupants as single family residential uses. State law also preempts local ordinances imposing special building, fire safety, fee or permit requirements on State - licensed drug or alcohol treatment facilities serving six or fewer • 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CR.LTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PACE 05 occupants. According to State law, the number of occupants does not Include the State licensee, members of the licensee's family, or persons employed at the facility. 2. The Fair Housing Act Amendments of 1988 (FHAA) prevents the City's from adopting or enforcing zoning ordinances that impact recovery facilities for handicapped Individuals differently than non - handicapped residential uses in the same zone unless the City: (a) can prove the ordinance is necessary to further a legitimate governmental interest; and (b) reasonably accommodates haridicapped individuals/uses by, a .BIVI'hg enforcement unless we can. prove that a walver would impose an undue burden the. City City and undermine the basic purpose of -the ordinance: . 3. The FHAA and related case law prohibits the City from, among other things, establishing a "one person per bedroom room" requirement for recovery facilities, imposing distance requirements.. between recovery facilities, and or preventing Ydr- profit" entities from establishing or operating recovery facilities. 4. The provisions of State law relative to the treatment of State - licensed recovery facilities serving six or fewer occupants and the provisions of the FHAA that prohibit discrimination combine to prevent the City. from treating unlicensed recovery facilities differently than State - licensed recovery facilities. PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MAY 20, 2004 At the Planning Commission meeting on May 201", staff and special counsel presented • the proposed Zoning Code amendments that were drafted in an effort to preserve the unique character of our diverse residential neighborhood In a manner consistent with State and Federal statutory and decisional law. The amendments presented on May 20, 2004 can be summarized as follows: 1. Various definitions — including "single family dwelling" and "family" — were modified and the term "single housekeeping unit" hes been added., (20.03.030) 2. Certain "Residential Use Classifications" were modified to more closely conform to law and the term "Residential Care; Gel idial" was added. (20.05.030) 3. A "Reasonable Accommodation" process was added to provide a mechanism.for persons to request, and for the City to evaluate and approve when appropriate, a "Reasonable Accommodation. (Section 20.91.020) 4. The matrix of permitted land uses in Residential Districts was been modified to permit "Residential Care, Limited" (recovery facilities with six or fewer occupants per dwelling unit) in all Districts. The matrix was also modified to prohibit Residential Care, General" in R -I and R -A Zones (20.10.020) and require a "Reasonable Accommodation" for "Residential Care, General" (recovery facilities with seven or more occupants per dwelling unit) uses in all other residential zones. iii i" cuuv U7:Ja 747 /n zzigi GKLIN .bKIL KNNL GHN rHuc uo During the public hearing on May 201', members of the Planning Commission and the public commented on, and asked staff and special counsel to evaluate, a number of • issues. The issues included: (a) why special counsel. and staff. were proposing amendments that allow recovery facilities with seven or more occupants'per - dwelling unit in the R1.5 and R-2 zones with a reasonable accommodation; (b) the extent of the City's ability to consider parcel size as a factor in the zones to which recovery facilities are located and /or the reasonable accommodation detem�ination; (c) the factors — Including impact on the neighborhood - the City could or- should consider In granting a - reasonable accommodation; (d) the extent of the City's ability to adopt and' apply special parking. standards to recovery facilities; (e) whether. the Planning Director or the Planning Commission should make the ..initial determination on "a reasonable accommodation; (e). the City's ability, if any, to establish limits on the number of recovery facilities Ina particular neighboihood,or- geographic area; and (f) the manner In which neighboring.00mmunitles are dwaling with�recovery facilities: PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF JUNE 17 2004 On June 17, 2004, staff and special counsel presented the Planning Commission with a revised ordinance that responded, where possible, to Issues raised during the May 200, meeting. The major. changes 10 the ordinance presented on May 201 were: (a) the addition of a definition of campus to. mean three or more buildings being used together for a•common purpose where one. of the buildings- provides a service for the users of fill buildings; (b) the. addltlon;of.a,' Federal° Exception '::Permlt'.(FEP).requlrerrtbriE for recovery.facllities in R -1.5; R -2 and MFR..zones and delineation of some of the factors • that the Planning Commission could consider in deciding whether to grant or deny an FEP; and (c) designating the Planning Commission — rather than the Planning Director- as the Initial. decision maker on an application for an FEP. DISCUSSION The proposed ordinance (Exhibit A) conforms to the recommendation of the Planning Commission represents what staff and special counsel believe is the most appropriate vehicle to reconcile State and Federal restrictions on. our.ability to regulate recovery facilities with the desire of the City Council to preserve the unique character of diffeeent residential neighborhoods. Newport Beach Is home to residential areas — such as the R -1.5 and R -2 zones near the beach and bay - that have a relatively high percentage of renters and a sizeable number of dwelling units that are offered as vacation rentals during the summer and to college students during the winter. These R -1.5 and R -2 zones are characterized by relatively small lots and, based on anecdotal evidence, relatively high densities. For these reasons, the proposed ordinance prohibits recovery facilities in R -1 zones (or the equivalent) and requires recovery facilities serving 7 or more occupants in the R 1 -5 and R -2 zones to obtain a Federal Exception Permit: 0 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 07 7/13/2004 05:33 949/522141 .Members of the Planning Commission and those who testified at the two public hearings suggested various amendments that would establish special development standards for recovery facilities. Staff and special counsel. are aware of _no hard evidence to Support a finding that recovery facilities— other than situations Involving a .campus" - have a greater Impact on parking than other residential uses. However, we have evidence that suggests the concentration of recovery facllltles in an area can increase the volume of traffic and the number of large commercial vehicles entering and leaving the area _ so we have incorporated those considerations Into the Federal Exception Permit process.. We have previously offered the opinion, based on legal research, that the City does not have the authority to regulate the number of recovery facilities In a given area or require that recovery facilities be separated by a specific distance. Finally, special counsel has prepared a matrix of the recovery facility regulations adopted by neighboring jurisdictions (Exhibit B). The proposed ordinance — which would amend provisions of the Zoning Code — does not address issues related to licenses that recovery facilities might be required to obtain under other provisions of the Municipal Code or the application of other provisions that regulate the conduct of people or require penults of certain land uses. This office and special, counsel will. be reviewing those issues separately and will provide the .City Council with an analysis sometime. In the near future. The proposed amendments are exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15305 (Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations) of the CEQA Guidelines. Su itted by: /Robert Burnham, Clty Attorney • 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN ERTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 08 • DRAFT ORDINANCE NO. _ AN ORDINANCE OF.THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NEWPORT REACH, CALIFORNIA AMENDING SECTIONS 20.03.030, 20.05.030, 20.05.040, 20.10.010 20.16.020 and Chapter 20.91 OF THE NEWPORT BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO ALL CATEGORIES OF GROUP LIVING WHEREAS, the City has adopted regulations on different types of group living arrangements at various times throughout the City's history; and WHEREAS, the existing regulations on group living are confusing and in freed of refinement; and WHEREAS, in light of the Fair Housing Act Amendments, 42 U.S.C. § 3601, et seq. (the "Act "), the City desires to codify its process for providing Federal Exception Perm_ its when appropriate under the Act; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Newport Beach hereby ordains as follows: SECTION I. The following definitions contained in Section 20.03.030 of the Newport • Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read as follows: • "Campus" means three or more buildings in a residential zone within a 300 yard radius of one another that are used together for a common purpose where one or more of the buildings provides a service for the occupants of all the buildings such as when one building serves as a kitchen/food service area for the occupants of the other buildings_ "Dwelling, multifamily" means a building containing three or more dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, single - family" means a building containing one dwelling unit for occupancy by one family. "Dwelling, two family" means a building containing two dwelling units, each of which is for occupancy by a one family. "Family" means one or more persons living as a Single Housekeeping Unit. The tern "Farnily" shall include residential care, limited facilities for six or fewer mentally disabled, mentally 261,D66751 -0039 5I:7690i a07,D6r04 EXHIBIT A. 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN ERTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 09 disordered or otherwise handicapped persons, but no other living group not living together as a single housekeeping unit.. "Single Housekeeping Unit" means the functional equivalent of a traditional family, whose members are a non- transient, interactive group of persons jointly occupying a single dwelling unit, including the joint use of common areas and sharing, household activities and responsibilities such as meals, chores, and expenses. SECTION 2. The following definitions contained in Section 20.05.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code are hereby amended to read in their entirety as follows: "Day -Care, Limited" means non - residential, non - medical care and supervision of twelve (12) or fewer persons on a less than twenty-four hour basis. This classification includes, but is not limited to nursery schools, preschools, and day -care centers for children (large and small family day -care homes) and adults. "Group residential" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit: This classification includes boarding houses, donnitories, fraternities, sororities, and private, residential clubs, but excludes Residential Care - Limited, Residential Care-Genet-4, and residential hotels (see Single -Room Occupancy (SRO) Residential Hotels, Section • 20.05.050(EE)(4)). "Residential Care- Limited' means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each rooln or unit for six or fewer persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification also includes, but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities, and establishments providing non- medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision' protection, or.assistance.es5ential for sustaining the activities of daily living. "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom_facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one ormore of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. • 261/066751 -0059 5126901 a0 *6PD4 -7- 07!13!2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN 3PTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 10 "Single- Family Residential" means buildings containing one . dwelling unit located on a single lot for occupancy by one family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built housing. "Two - Family Residential" means buildings containing-two dwelling units located on a single lot, each unit limited to occupancy by a single family. This classification includes mobile home and factory built. housing. SECTION 3: The definition of "Residential Care, General" contained in Section 20.05.040 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows. "Residential Care, General" means shared living quarters without separate kitchen or bathroom facilities for each room or unit for seven or more persons with physical or mental impairments which substantially limit one or more of such person's major life activities. This classification includes but is not limited to group homes, sober living environments, recovery facilities-and establishments providing non - medical care for persons in need of personal services, supervision, protection or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. •SECTION 4. Subsection Hof Section 20.10.010 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: H Provide public services and facilities to accommodate planned population and densities. The specific residential districts and their purposes are as follows: Residential - Agricultural (R -A) District Provides areas for single - family residential and light farming uses. Single - Family Residential (R -1) District This is the City's most restrictive residential zoning district, established to provide for a stable, social neighborhood for single-family residential land uses by limiting occupancy to one family. Restricted Two Family Residential (R -1.5) District. Provides a as for sin#1 family and t family residential land uses with f total gros3lloor area of aibuildings limited to a maximum Door area ratio of 1.5 times the buildable area. Two Family Residential (4Z -2) District. Provides areas for • single- family and two family residential land uses. 2611066751.0/059 312369,01 007/06/01 -�- 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 11 Multifamily Residential (MFR) District. Provides areas for single - family, two - family, and multiple family residential land • uses. SECTION 5. Section 20.10.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.10.020 Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations. The following schedule establishes the lend us0v defiried iii Cheptei.20.05 as permitted or conditionally permitted in residential districts, and inclines special . requirements, if any, applicable to specific uses. The letter'T" designates use classifications permitted in residential districts. The letter . "L "'designates use classifications subject to certain limitations prescribed under the "Additional Use Regulations" which follows. The letters "UP" designate use classifications permitted on approval of a use permit, as provided in Chapter 20:91. The letters ' PD/U' designate use classifications permitted on approval of a.use permit issued by the Planning Director, as provided in Chapter 20.91. The letters " P/UF" designate use classifications which are permitted when located on the site of another permitted use, but which require a use permit when locate4 on the site of a conditional use. The letters RA. designates use classifications for which a Federal ExceptiomPeunit must first be obtained pursuant to Cliaptec 21).91. Letters in parentheses in the "Additional Regulations" column refer to "Additional Use Regulations" following the schedule_ Where letters in parentheses are opposite a use classification heading, referenced regulations shall apply to all use classifications under the heading. • Residential Districts: Land Use Regulations P - Permitted UP - Use permit 1 PD/U = Use permit issued by the Planning Director L = Limited (see Additional Use Regulations) FEP - Federal Exception Permit a Not Permitted R -1.5 �J; R -2 FR �__ Additional I Regulations _ 1 RESIDENTIAL )� ___ -- (A), (g), (C) Day -Care, Limited - --- - - - --- P_ Residential Care, Limited — P Re Residential Care, General side -- Single-family Residential -�1�� I — —]p FEp - - -I FEP -- j p FEP IMultifamily Residential Residential :61:0661;0059 S 17769.01 .07/04/Oe —4— L ..... 07/13;2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 12 'BLIC AND SEMI - PUBLIC emeteries Clubs and Lodges G2 -_ AK= 177-1. 12 j Eu�_=� L -2 Convalescent Facilities 'Pay-Care, General_ Government Offices ,L -22 - - - -- ;Hospitals I ark and Recreation Facilities j Public Safety Facilities �I�� UP JP U _— 1 . JP Eup_ Up Religious Assembly Schools, Public and Private Utilities; Major Utilities, Minor -- _ UP rp � UP UP COMMERCIAL USES �� Horticulture; Limited. —i� v -�� -- (A ). (B), (C) p _ _j - I I .. --l---_..._._---...------ Nursenes hicle/Equipment Sales and oaunen ia! Parkin Facility Visitor Accommodations -Bed and Breakfast Inns 1� ---;F �— —� F — SRO Residential Hotels !� —�� —�� --lF__ --j _ AGRICULTURAL AND I EXTRACTIVE USES (A), (B), (C) Animal husbandry D/ F(G) !Crop Production Mining and Processing CCESSORYUSES Accessory Accessory Structures end Uses ��P/U . LA —P P/1Jp p/Up p/Up pl(Jp (B) (C) — (1) —_ -- _. I TEItIPORARY USES cuses and Carnivals lr p - - -{ P P P �K) ---�j • 261,06615 1.0039 512]69.01 a0F0&rd -5- 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 ng, Limited Sales — Estate Residential Districts: Additional Land Use Regulations P CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 13 L -1: Twenty (20) acres minimum. L -2: Limited to yacht clubs, use permit requited. L -3: Public. or no fee private lots for automobiles may be permitted in any residential district adjacent to any commercial or industrial district subject to the securing of a use permit in each case. L-4: See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. L -5: Subject to the approval of the Planning Director. (A): See Section 20.60.025, Relocatable. Buildings. (B): See Section 20.60.015, Temporary Structures and Uses- (C):. See Section 20.60.050, Outdoor Lighting_ . (D): With the exception of uses in the R -I Zone, any dwelling unit otherwise permitted by this Code may be used for short term lodging purposes as defined in Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code subject to the securing of: 1. A business license pursuant.to Chapter. 5.04 of the Municipal Code. 2. A transient occupancy registration certificate pursuant to Section 3.16.060 of the Municipal Code. 3. A short term lodging permit pursuant to Chapter 5.95 of the Municipal Code. .(E): Set Chapter 20.85, Accessory Dwelling Units. (f): See Section 20.60.110, Bed and Breakfast Inns. (G): Keeping of Animals in the R -A District. The following regulations shall apply to the keeping of animals in the R -A District: I. Large Animals. The keeping of large animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall be subject to the following regulations: a. Horses. One horse may be kept f6r each ten thousand (10,000) square feet of lot area, up to a maximum of three horses; provided, the horse or horses are kept for recreational purposes only. The keeping of four or more horses for recreational uses shall require a use permit issued by tlne Planning Director. The keeping of horses for commercial purposes shall require a use permit issued by the Planning Commission. b. Other Large Animals. Other large animals, including goats, sheep, pigs and cows, maybe kept on lots of fifteen thousand (15,000) square feet or more and the_number shall not exceed two adult animals of any one species. c. Total Number Permitted. The total number of large animals shall not exceed six_ Offspring are exempt until such time as they are weaned. 2. Domestic and Exotic Animals. The number of domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030) shall not exceed six- Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. The keeping of four or more dogs over the age of three months shall require a kennel license pursuant to Section 7.04.090 of the Municipal Code. The keeping of wild animals shall require a permit pursuant to Chapter 7.08 of die Municipal Code. 3. Small Animals. The number of small animals, other than domestic and exotic animals (as defined in Section 20.03.030), shall not exceed six. Offspring are exempt up to the age of three months. 4_ Control. 161N66751 W59 512369 01 e07,06,04 -6- • 07/13,2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 14 a. Domestic Animals. No such animals, except for cats, shall be permitted to un at large, but shall be confined. at all times within a suitable enclosure or otherwise under the control of the owner of the property. b. Other Animals. No animal, other than domestic animals, shall be permitted to run at large, but shall be confuted, at all times within a suitable "enclosure. (H): See Chapter 20.8 1, Oil Wells. (n: See Section 20.60.100,:Rome Occupations in Residential Districts. (J)'. See Section 20.60.055, Heliports and Helistops. (K): Special event permit required, see Chapter 5.10 of the Municipal Coda (L): See Section 20.60,120, Personal Property Sales.in Residential Districts. (M): See Section 20.60.125, Design Standards. for Mobile Homes on Individual Lots. \J • SECTION 6. Section 20.91.015 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.015 Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit Requisite to Other Permits. Nd building:permit or certificate of occupancy shall be issued in any case where a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit is required by the terms of this code, unless and until such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit has been granted by the Planning Director of the Planning Commission or by the affirmative vote of the City Council on appeal or review and then only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the use permit, variance or Federal °Exception Permit granted. SECTION 7. Section 20.91.020 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.020 Application for Use Permit, Variance, or Federal Exception Permit. . An application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall be filed in a planner consistent with the requirements contained in Chapter 20.90, Application Filing and Fees. . SECTION 8. Section 20.91.025 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 261 M66751q 59 512169.01 .07!0&A 20.91.025 Duties of the Planning Director and the Planning Commission. A. Authority. The Planning Commission shall approve, conditionally approve, or disapprove applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits, unless the authority for -7- 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CNN PAGE 15 an administrative decision on a use permit is specifically assigned • to the Planning Director in the individual chapters of this code. t Exception. The City Council shall have final decision- making authority on the applications for use permits, variances and Federal Exception Permits filed concurrently with amendments to the general plan, zoning code, or a planned community development plan or with a development agreement. B. Rendering of Decision After the conclusion of the hearing on any application.for a use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit; the Planning Commission shall render a decision within thirt y -five (35) days. Where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director, the Planning Director shall render a decision within fourteen (14) days of the acceptance of a completed application. C. Report to the Planning Commission. Upon rendering a decision on a use permit, the Planning Director shall report to the Planning Commission at the next regular meeting or within fourteen (14) days of the decision, whichever is appropriate. D. Notice of Decision- Upon the rendering of a decision on a use permit by the Planning Director, a notice of the decision shall be mailed to the applicant . and ,all owners of property within three • hundred (300) feet of the boiindariei of the site. SECTION 9. Section 20.91.030 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows: 20.91.030 Notice and Public Hearing. A. Public Hearings. The Planning Commission shall hold a public hearing on an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit . Public hearings are not required for applications where the authority for an administrative decision on a use permit is assigned to the Planning Director. B. Timing of Hearings. A public hearing shall be held on all use permit, variance, and Federal Exception Permit applications, except as otherwise provided in this chapter, within sixty (60) days after the acceptance of a completed application. 1 The Plannin_ -e Commission Pireeter -shall have the ability to review an application for a Feasenahip Federal Exceptions Permit regardless of whether this code specifically provides for such a Feasenabi e aecernmedationFederal Exception Permit when otherwise •. required by state or federal law. 161N66751.0059 517!69.01 %07106104 -Q- Z7/13/2004 69:33 9497922141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 16 C. Required Notice. Notice of a public hearing or an • administrative decision shall be given as follows: 1. Mailed or Delivered Notice. a. Residential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three-hundred (300) feet of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records as contain more recent addresses. It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section. b. Nonresidential Districts. At least ten days prior to the hearing or an administrative decision, notice shall be mailed to the applicant and all owners of property within three hundred (300) feet, excluding intervening rights -of -way and waterways, of the boundaries of the site, as shown on the last equalized assessment roll or, alternatively, from such other records. as contain more recent addresses, It shall be the responsibility of the applicant to obtain and provide to the City the names and addresses of owners as required by this section.: • 2. Posted Notice. Notice shall be posted in not less than two conspicuous places on or close to the property at least ten days prior to the hearing or the administrative decision. 3. Published Notice. Notice shall he published in at least one newspaper of general circulation within the City, at least ten days prior to the hearing. D. Contents of Notice. The notice of public hearing or of the decision of the Planning Director shall contain: 1. Ad escription of the location of the project site and the purpose of the application; 2. A statement of the time, place, and purpose of the public hearing or of the purpose of the administrative decision; 3. A reference to application materials on file for detailed information; 4, A statement that any interested person or authorized agent may appear and be heard at the planning hearing and an • explanation of their rights of appeal in the case of an administrative decision. 2611066I5L0059 512369.01 0A06, a -9 _ 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN 8RTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 17, E. Continuance. Upon the date set for a public hearing before • the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission may continue the hearing to another date without giving further notice thereof if the date of the continued hearing is announced in open meeting. SECTION 10. Section 20.91.035 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.035 Required Flndirrgs. The Planning Commission or the Planning Director, as the case may be, shall approve or conditionally approve an application for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit if, on the basis of the application, plans, materials, and testimony submitted, the Planning Commission or the Planning Director finds: A.- For Use Permits. 1. That the proposed location of the use is in accord with the objectives of this code and the purposes of the district in which the site is located; 2. Thaf the proposed location of the use permit and the proposed conditions under.which it would be operated or maintained will be consistent with the general plan and the purpose .' of the district in which the site is located; will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, peace, morals, comfort, or welfare of persons residing or working in or adjacent to the neighborhood of such use; and will not be detrimental to the properties or improvements in the vicinity or to the general welfare of the city; 3. That the proposed use will comply with the provisions of this code, including any specific condition required for the proposed use in the district in which it would be located. B. For Variances. 1. That because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings, the strict application of this code deprives such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification; 2. The granting of the application is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights of the applicant; 261,D66151-0059 ! 12369.01 47,06a34 0 07!13!2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 18 3. The granting of the application is consistent with the purposes of this code and will not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations on other properties in the vicinity and in the same zoning district; 4., The granting of such application will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, materially affect adversely the health or safety of persons residing or working in the neighborhood of the property of the applicant and will not under the circumstances of the particular case be materially detrimental to the public welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the neighborhood. C. For Federal. Exception Permits!. ' related. The Federal Exception Permit sought is handicapped- 2. The applicant has. demonstrated that the living group residing in the Dwelling functions as a Single Housekeeping Unit as evidenced by.factors including; but'not limited to a lack of tiBnsieucey'Aman$ its members:: For the purposes of Federal Exception.Pennits in other thin the -' I Zone, 'a lack of transiencey • shall mean the household does not change more than 50% of its members in any given calendar year. 3. The Federal Exception Permit neither requires a fundamental alteration in the nature of a program affected by the Federal Exception Permit nor imposes an undue financial or. administrative burden on the City which creates an undue hardship on the City. To the extent authorized by law, the factors the Planning Commission, or the City Council on review or appeal may consider the following in deciding whether to grant a Federal Exception Permit include, but are not necessarily limited to: (i) whether vehicular .traffic congestion in the neighborhood would be increased to an extent that would be contrary to, or violate,.any relevant provision of_the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; 2 A "Federal Exception Permit" is the name of the permit and application process necessary to obtain a "reasonable accommodation' as that term is used in the Federal Fair HouslnR Act Amendments (Fl-IAA) and the case law implementing the FHAA The application for a Federal • ,Exception PeaUit shall be approved unless the evidence in the administrative record establishes one of the findings for denial 26i'066751 -0059 512369.01 907!06,01 07/13/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 19 , (ii) whether the nature of vehicular traffic, such as the frequency or duration of trips by commercial vehicles, would be altered to a such an extent that it would be contrary to, or violate, any relevant provision of the Newport Beach Municipal Code if the Federal Exception Permit was approved; or (iii) whether development or use standards established in the Newport Beach Municipal Code and that are applicable to other residential uses in the neighborhood would be violated; or (iv) whether a Campus would be established in a residential zone if the Federal Exception Permit were granted; SECTION 11, Section 20.91.0 40 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.040 Conditions of Approval. The Planning Cormmission or the Planning Director, as the case may he, may impose such conditions in connection with the granting of a use permit, variance,_ or Federal Exception Permit as they deem necessary to secure the purposes of this code and may require guarantees and evidence that such-conditions are being or will be complied with. Such conditions may include requirements for off - street parking facilities as determined in each case. SECTION-12. Section 20.91.045 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding-a new subsection C relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.045 Effective Date. Use permits, variances, and Federal Exception Permits shall not become effective for fourteen (14) days after being granted, and in the event an appeal is filed or if the Planning Commission or the City Council shall exercise its right to review any such decision under the provisions of Chapter 26.95, the permit shall not become' effective unless and until a decision granting the use perrnit;.vsriance or Federal Exception Permit is made by the Planning Commission or the. City Council. SLCT10N 13. Section 20.91.050 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended by adding a new subsection C. relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.050 Expiration, Time Extension, Violation, Discontinuance, and Revocation. A. Expiration. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code shall expire 161/0667! 1 0059 512369.0, 07;06q -12- • • 07/13112004 09:33 9457522141 CRLTN ERTZ KNPL CNN PAGE 20 within twenty-four (24) months from the effective date of approval • or at an alternative time specified as a condition of approval unless.. 1. A grading permit has been issued and grading has been substantially completed; or 2. A building permit has been issued and construction has commenced; or 3. A certificate.of occupancy has been issued; or 4. The use is established; or 5. A time extension has been granted. In cases where a coastal permit is required, the time period shall not begin until the effective date of approval of the coastal. permit. B. Time Extension. The Planning Director may grant a time extension for a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit for a period or periods not to exceed three years. An application for a time extension shall be.made -in writing to the Planning Director no less than thirty (30) days or more than ninety (90) days prior to the • expiration date. C. Violation of Terms. Any use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit granted in accordance with the terms of this code may be revoked if any of the conditions or terms of such use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit are violated, or if any law or ordinance is violated in connection therewith. D. Discontinuance. A use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit shall lapse if the exercise of rights granted by it is discontinued for one hundred eighty (180) consecutive days. E. Revocation.. Proced ures for revocation shall be as prescribed by Chapter 20.96, Enforcement. SECTION 14. Section 20.91.055 of the Newport Beach Municipal Code is hereby amended relating to Federal Exception Permits. 20.91.055 Amendments and New Applications. A. Amendments. A request for changes in conditions of approval of a use permit, variance, or Federal Exception Permit or a change to plans that would affect a condition of approval shall be treated as a • new application. The Planning Director may waive the requirement 261,066751 -059 512369.01 .02106.c4 -13- 07/13;2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN PAGE 21 for a new application if the changes are minor, do not involve substantial alterations or additions to the plan or the conditions of approval, and are consistent with the intent of the original • approval. B. New Applications: If ad application for a use permit; variance, or Federal Exception Permit is disapproved, no new application for the same, or substantially t6 same, use permit, variance or Federal Exception Permit shall be'frled within one year of the date of denial of the initial application unless, the denial is made without prejudice. • .61,1066751 -0059 512369.01 .07;D6,04 -14- 0//ld/2004 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNFL CHN ?AGE 22 Bob Burnham, City Attorney, City of Newport Beach • July 6, 2004 Page 2 as a "Referral Facility." A Referral Facility is a Residential Care or Residential Service facility where one or more of the person's residency in the facility is pursuant to a court order or directive from an agency in the criminal justice system. The category does not, however, include state license facilities containing 6 or fewer persons. Referral Facilities are prohibited in the City's R -1 zone and permitted by conditional use permit in all of the City's other residential zones. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) III. City of Laguna Beach The City of Laguna Beach does not expressly regulate sober living homes, residential treatment facilities or other group homes. The city does, however, limit residency to "families," defined as "an individual or two or more persons related by flood, marriage or adoption, living together or a group of not more than six persons (excluding servants) not all of whom are related by blood, marriage or adoption but all of them are living together as a single housekeeping unit within a dwelling so that all persons within the unit maintain free access to all living spaces within the dwelling. (Laguna Beach Municipal Code § 25.08.012.) Under state law, all residential care facilities and alcohol rehabilitation.facilities serving 6 or fewer persons would therefore be permitted in all the City's residential zones. It is unclear how the City regulates • residential care facilities, group.homes or alcohol recovery facilities serving 7 or more. L 261,D66731 -0059 307733.01 006116,V4 @7/1J/2UU4 TO: F7ti:ji '347522141 FROM: DATE: CKL I N biK I L KM UHN MEMORANDUM Bob Burnham, City Attorney, City of Newport Beach Jeffrey A. Goldfarb July 6, 2004 FILE NO.: 066751 -0059 RE: Nearby Cities' Mechanism for Regulating Sober Living Environments PAGE 23 • You have asked that we review the mechanism that adjoining cities use for the regulation of sober living facilities. We have reviewed the Municipal codes for the Cities of Costa Mesa, Irvine and Laguna Beach. Below is a discussion of each city's regulatory approach. I. City of Irvine The City of Irvine defines a sober living facility "as any house,' institution, hotel or similar place that provides room and board, or rooms only, and operates as a drug and alcohol free residential facility-7. (Irvine Zoning Ord. § 1- 2 -1.). Irvine permits sober living facilities in all residential zoues`with tare exception of the. "estate densityresidential zone ". (one house per acre) without regard to the number of persons the facility serves and without regard to whether the residents are living together as a single housekeeping unit.: (Irvine Municipal Code § 3 -3 -1.) Irvine also includes regulates a category of uses entitled "Residential Care facilities," (Irvine Zoning Ord. § 1 -2 -1.) which are defined as "any family home, group care facility or similar facility providing 24 -hour non - medical services, supervisions or assistance essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. Residential Care facilities includes shelters; board and care facilities, half way houses, wards of the juvenal court and the like and excludes Sober living facilities:" (Id.) The Irvine Zoning Ordinance allows Residential Care facilities in all residential zones with a Conditional Use Permit. (Irvine Municipal Code § 3 -3 -1.) Because Residential Care facilities expressly exclude all "Sober Living Facilities," the Irvine Zoning Ordinance would allow all drug and alcohol free group living facilities, in every residential zoned as a matter of right without regard to number of residents- if. City of Costa Mesa Costa Mesa includes sober living facilities within the definition.of residential care facilities (which are state licensed facilities), and residential service facilities (which are not state licensed facilities). Residential Care and Service facilities serving 6 or fewer are permitted in all of the city's residential zones. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) Residential Care and Service facilities serving 7 or more are prohibited in the City's R -1 zone, and conditionally permitted in all other residential zones of the City. (Costa Mesa Municipal Code § 13 -30.) The City Code also contains a special category of Residential Care and Service facilities referred to 261/066751 -0059 307735.01,061;6,04 Z'�d3S�AQ1I'+ � • • 01 /1d /2IJN4 09:33 9497522141 CRLTN BRTZ KNPL CHN LAW OFFICES OF DANIEL C. CARLTON 2600 MICHELSON DRIVE, SUITE 1120 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 • FACSIMILE TRANSMITTAL SHEET TO: FROM: Robert Burnham, Esq. Daniel C. Carlton COMPANY: City of Newport Beach FAX NUMBER: (949) 644 -3139 PHONE NUMBER: (949) 644 -3131 RE: Narconon Southern California NOTESICOMMENTS. DATE: 07113/04 TOTAL NO. OF PAGES INCLUDING COVER: 23 PACE 01 PLEASE NOTE: If you do not receive the whole transmission or if you have any difficulty reading the pages, please contact Heather at (B49) 757 -0707. THE INFORMATION CONTAINED IN THIS FACSIMILE 13 INTENDED ONLY FOR THE USE OF THE INDIVIDUAL OR ENTITY TO WHICH IT 13 ADDRESSED AND MAY CONTAIN INFORMATION THAT IS PRIVILEGED, CONFIDENTIAL AND EXEMPT FROM DISCLOSURE UNDER APPLICABLE LAW. IF THE READER OF THIS MESSAGE IS NOT THE INTENDED RECIPIENT, YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED THAT ANY DISSEMINATION, DISTRIBUTION OR COPY OF THIS FACSIMILE IS STRICTLY PROHIBITED: IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED THIS FACSIMILE IN ERROR, PLEASE IMMEDIATELY NOTIFY US BY TELEPHONE AND RETURN THE ORIGINAL MESSAGE TO US AT THE ABOVE ADDRESS VIA THE U.S. POSTAL SERVICE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COOPERATION. • 2600 MICHELSON DRiVE. SUITE 1120 IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92612 TELEPHONE: (949) 757.0707 FACSIMILE' (54?) 752 -2 14+ • N,ARvINON SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA July 27, 2004 City of Newport Beach City Council 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA RE: AGENDA ITEM 4, July 27, 2004 Council Meeting Dear Sirs: I am sending you this packet to better inform you on the National Drug Control Policy of the Office of the President and to give you some examples of the many cases cities have lost trying to restrict group homes and the disabled, of which people in recovery qualify. Sincerely, Gerry CC: Jon Stearman, Narconon City Manager, Newport Beach City Attorney, Newport Beach RUG AND ALCOHOL EDUCATION AND REHABILITATION SERVICES 810 WEST OCEAN FRONT, NEWPORT BEACH, CA 92663 PHONE (800) 876 -6378 FAX (949) 675.8991 NARCONON Southern California is a non -profit public benefit corporation www.addictionca.com CSP,Inc. (949)250 -0891 P.3" 0 '�` + EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY a, _ Washington, DC 20503 Dear Friends and Colleagues: One of our nation's most important concerns is addressing alcohol and drug use disorders. President Bush has made it a priority to expand treatment options for those in need. This September, during the 15i° annual National Alcohol and Drug Addiction Recovery Month (Recovery Month). the White House salutes those in recovery and the treatment providers and recovery support program officials who have contributed to their successes. Recovery Month recognizes the crucial role of alcohol and drug treatment programs in our fight to promote recovery. This year's theme — "Join the Voices for Recovery ... Now!"—is intended to encourage support for effective and coordinated treatment and recovery services for those in need. To encourage the availability of effective treatment, President Bush has created a new initiative known as Access to Recovery. This effort will help thousands of people gain access to the type of treatment for alcohol and drug use disorders that works best for them. Your work at the local level is vital to improving Americans' access to treatment programs. During Recovery Month and throughout the year, you contribute greatly to highlighting the benefits of alcohol and drug use disorder treatment On behalf of the President, I thank you for your ongoing commitment to help those with alcohol and drug use disorders and their families overcome barriers to treatment and recovery. With your help, we can guide more Americans through the recovery process and affect positive change in our society. Sincerely, John P. Walters Director • • • National Fair Horsing Advocat� Online Page 1 of 2 • $85, 00 to cover the plaintiffs' legal costs; • $5,0 ?0 to cover the housing costs of the man who could not move into Cedar Heig is whilerenovation was delayed; • A corpmunity outreach program to inform the public about services and bene Its availableto Fresno residents with disabilities; and • Are ew of Fresno's current housing programs to determine if any changes are n eded toaccommodate persons with disabilities_ City violat4d taw by °going aionq° with Council member's pian to keepdisabl�d persons out According tj the Justice Department, the City violated the Fair Housing Act and othercivil ri hts laws when its officials went along with one council member's z. ^paign to keeppe.r a vi: 11 ^rental disabilities out of Cedar Height;. T'he Councilman, :vho is no longer enthe COUnc-P, ;:anted guarantees that the tenants at Cedar Heighits would not "exposethemselves" or defecate on his constituents' lawns. With jut that guarantee, the mansaid that he would burn the building down. i'he City's a4ions not oniy denied housing opportunities to potential tenants at CedarHeigh : thev also forced a man ready to move in to find other suitable w • http : / /ww.fairhousing.com/iDdex. 9 methoftage.disp1ay &pageID==3210 7/25/2004 01'01 S690Z8L09LT 093Ia NUS N0NO3NUN d00 =90 b0 9Z T ^C r- ._ A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Council i• search: Nat onai Fair Housing ^< -- Ativ +gate Online search March 1998 only ❑ NFNAO ome f aboU WHAO r forums go :o advanced search < contact us search help < — News Archive, Old Headlines City f Fresnor California agrees to $535,000 Press Releases . in ]u tice Department disability Print Advocate Acton Alerts disc 'mination case — Discussion Message Forums . Th e oily Fresno, California will pay $535,000 and will no longer oppose the The Guest Rcom renovatio of an apartment building which will provide housing for persons with mental di bilitiesunder an agreement reached with the Department of Justice in — Resources- April. The settlementresolves a fair housing complaint filed by the Justice Get Help Near You Oepartme t which alleged cityofFicials' actions had denied housing opportunities to Events persons b sed on disability. Job Listings Links CityCoun it member opposed allowing mentally disabled tenants to five in Bock Club building Sponsors A private I wsuit, filed by a Califomia man and two Fresno non -profit agencies, —Legal Research - wasalso s Wed under the agreement. The agencies, Family Alliance for the Case Database Mentally II andAffordable Homes, Inc., had sought to renovate a 22 -unit vacant Recovery Database complex. ey met withstiff opposition from a Fresno city council member when it was learn that mentallydisabled persons would live in the renovated building • HUD Settlements - called Ced r Heights. Statutes and Regs Articles Under the ettlement agreement, the city agreed to provide the following: HUD Resources • Trai ing for its employees and officials to ensure they will not discriminate agai stpersons with disabilities in the future; • W4 ,000 in grants to help pay for the renovation of the Cedar Heights • $85, 00 to cover the plaintiffs' legal costs; • $5,0 ?0 to cover the housing costs of the man who could not move into Cedar Heig is whilerenovation was delayed; • A corpmunity outreach program to inform the public about services and bene Its availableto Fresno residents with disabilities; and • Are ew of Fresno's current housing programs to determine if any changes are n eded toaccommodate persons with disabilities_ City violat4d taw by °going aionq° with Council member's pian to keepdisabl�d persons out According tj the Justice Department, the City violated the Fair Housing Act and othercivil ri hts laws when its officials went along with one council member's z. ^paign to keeppe.r a vi: 11 ^rental disabilities out of Cedar Height;. T'he Councilman, :vho is no longer enthe COUnc-P, ;:anted guarantees that the tenants at Cedar Heighits would not "exposethemselves" or defecate on his constituents' lawns. With jut that guarantee, the mansaid that he would burn the building down. i'he City's a4ions not oniy denied housing opportunities to potential tenants at CedarHeigh : thev also forced a man ready to move in to find other suitable w • http : / /ww.fairhousing.com/iDdex. 9 methoftage.disp1ay &pageID==3210 7/25/2004 01'01 S690Z8L09LT 093Ia NUS N0NO3NUN d00 =90 b0 9Z T ^C National Fair Housing Online housing while therenovation was held up. Page 2 of 2 Cedar Ijeights renovation will address Fresno's need for affordable housing formen{aliy disabled Charles tevens, the 11S Attorney in Sacramento, said that opposition to housing for thedi bled was "counterproductive." He went on to say, "Everyone agreed thatthe r000sed renovation of Cedar Heights will help address the lack of affordabl housingfor people with mental disabilities in Fresno. We're glad that the cty and he non- profitagencies will be able to devote their time and resources to the reno tion, instead oflitigation." Isabelle atz Pinzler, Acting Assistant Attorney General for Civil Rights, agreed withStev ns. "Stereotypical attitudes should not stand in the way of the right of w people' h mental disabilities to find an affordable place to live.' She later added," t e are pleased that the City agreed to work out our concerns." Protedio and Advocacy, Inc., Mental Health Advocacy Services, the Western Center o w and Poverty, Central California Legal Services, and Fresno attorney Sack Dan! Irepresented the plaintiffs in the private lawsuit against the city. 3a k Dan` :, who works with Central California Legal, Services commented, 'NUMSYs. is on the upswing and politicians are demagoguing behind it. Now is the time for a vocatesto dig in. The law is good. Dig in and fight like hell and we'll win." from June 1997 Advocate E E ,method age. display &pageIIJ =-� 210 7/25/2004 ti dT0;90 io 9Z Inc 11'd S6900BL09LT 09316 NklS W01,10381:11,1 National Fair Housing Advocal� Online Page I of I ,.... , f lei - €A News Archive Old Headlines Press Releases Print Advocate Action Alerts Discussion Message Forums The Guest Room Resources Get Help Near You Events )ob Listings Links Book Club Sponsors —Legal Research • Case Database Recovery Database HUD Settlements Statutes and Regis Articles HUD Resources ohttjx://www 2 -d contac A project of the Yennesseg Fair Housing Council onal Fair Housing search: go :)cate Online Search September _995only 1-, Home { about NFHAO !forums go to advanced search < us search heiv < City f Taylor.. Michigan agrees to pay $55 ,000 for refusing to rezone adult resi ential care center .: -..� > t -�:�s ;c: ce; ?.`� > ii:_ ':�iiti_c�c > = •:.;:�a':i: _. .. c.,_ In yet an ther instance where a city's government has been accused of denying housing r ghts to its disabled citizens, another large settlement has been reached. The city f Taylor, Michigan has agreed to pay $550,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit fit d by the owners of a residential facility for disabled adults. Acmrdin to the lawsuit, Taylor officials had refused to allow the facility to house more tha six residents because of zoning laws. The residential facility was in a single fa ily area. Zoning requirements in single family areas limited the number of persons It 'ng together to six. When the facility asked that their property be rezoned allow 12 residents, Taylor officials said no. Both Smit and Lee Associates, the owners and operators of the facility, and the US Departrne t of Justice filed separate federal lawsuits. Both lawsuits claimed that rezoning a property to allow more residents is a reasonable accommodation under the air Housing Act's disability provisions. Taylor settled the Justice Departme t suit by agreeing to allow nine residents at the facility. Smith and Lee Associates continued its lawsuit. In Decem r 1996, the Sixth Circuit court issued a ruling on behalf of the plaintiffs, agreeing t at the city of Taylor had failed to make a reasonable accommodation. The court (so held that the city must allow up to nine residents in adult care facilities a en if those facilities are in single family zones. Following a Sixth Circuit's ruling, the city of Taylor agreed to settle with Smith and Lee As fates. The cash settlement included money for lost profits, damages, attorneys' ees, Iegal costs, and interest. Taylor officials also agreed to an injunction Orohibiting it from interfering with the operations of adult foster care facilities in prgle family neighborhoods so long as they had nine or fewer residents. 7/25/2004 I 96902BL09LT 093I0 NHS N01,103bH1,1 dLS'SO iD 92 In .dational Fair Housing Advooatle Online Page 1 of 2 — A project OF the Teadesseg Fair Housing Cound! • McCartney Message Fcrums . c _.y .., -. -.. .. l.i search: !Vat oval Fair Housing ;m i Advocate Online search NFHAO STOPUES only . NFHAO Home 1 about NFHAO ; forums i D go to advanced search < (SEDON Costa Us search help < — News Archive - oid Headlines City, group home reach 'bittersweet' Press Releases . setts ment Print Advocate ersweet victory." Action Alerts ; igme > News Archive > NFHAO STORIES — Discussion gY Trace McCartney Message Fcrums . National air Housing Advocate Online The Guest Room subdivisio for a group of its clients. The organization obtained licensing and ghts, said Diana Chen, an attorney with the ACDL. (SEDON Ariz., July 14, 2003) -- Operators of a group home in Sedona, Ariz., will — Resources- receive ore than half a million dollars from the city in a settlement their attorney Get Help Near You Calls a "b ersweet victory." Everts The pros s for getting a conditional use permit in Sedona involves notification of Job Listinos It's "bitte weet" because, while the settlement gets the operators out of debt and Links out of a s uation that was draining their resources, it also means that they will Eock C:ub abandon a site they were hoping to use for a group home for individuals Sponsors recoverin from substance abuse. -Legal Research - In late 20 2, Recovery Alternatives, an organization that provides housing for Case Database people in overy from substance abuse, acquired a home in Sedona's Kachina • Recovery Database subdivisio for a group of its clients. The organization obtained licensing and ghts, said Diana Chen, an attorney with the ACDL. complet renovations of the property only to be told by the city that it had to get HUD Settlements - a "conditi nal use permit" before it could open. Statutes and Regs • Articles The pros s for getting a conditional use permit in Sedona involves notification of HUD Resources neighbors nd public hearings. After angry neighbors in the hearings convinced the city to to down the application for the permit, Recovery Alternatives sought legal help fro m he Arizona Center for Disability Law, a federally funded non - profit ACDL filed P discrimination complaint with the Arizona Attorney General's office on Recovery Iternatives' behalf in January 2003. Under the Fair Housing Act and similar Art na law, housing discrimination against people with disabilities is illegal. Individuals in recovery from substance abuse are considered disabled under the law, althou h those currently using controlled substances are not. In respons to the complaint, the city reversed itself and re- classified the home, removing a y obstacles to its opening. This, however, led the neighbors to threaten th it own lawsuit against the city. The city th threatened to simply delay any action until a judge could sort out everyone's ghts, said Diana Chen, an attorney with the ACDL. Meanwhile, ecovery Alternatives was paying interest on a line of credit it had taken out t operate the home and was running into problems with agencies that had given it grants to provide housing, she said. • Even thoug Recovery Alternatives' decision to abandon the site might appear to be a victory for the neighbors who didn't want the home there, the settlement was in h tp:!;v.: �v.fai hausi ^.g.comrindex. E lmefhed= page.display &YageID =32 °4 7!2512004 Z1 d S69DZ9LD9L1 09319 NHS NOW098" JOD:9D VD 92 TIC National Fair Housing • E • kdvoca* Online Page 2 of 2 her clien best interest under the circumstances, Ms. Chen said. "It was j r*t too poisonous a situation," she said. For th months, neighbors displayed brightly colored signs in their front yards expressi g their opposition to the home, and the operators had to look at those signs ev Ind y day when they visited the site, she said. Neighbo also expressed concern that the residents would be allowed off the rounds g wondered whether their children would be safe outside, Ms. Chen said. 'They (R covery Alternatives) decided their residents weren't going to feel free to even wal through the neighborhood,' Ms. Chen said. The orgarlization will try to find a site in a neighboring city, but there's no guaran[ it won't face obstacles elsewhere, she said. Under they settlement, the city agreed to: • pe anentry post a disclaimer in Sedona City Hall which states that di riminatlon on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, fa ilia' status, or disability is prohibited; • off r a Fair Housing training session to City staff working on housing issues; • pur hase complainant's property intended for the group home for a sum of $3 ,000.00; • pay a settlement amount of $148,334.00, which included attorneys fees and cos to th e Center; and • con ne a study session of its Planning Commission in consultation with the Center within 120 days of the agreement to consider revisions and am ndments to the Land Development Code and other City codes regarding placlament of group homes and the City's obligation and duties under the fed "I and state Fair Housing Acts and other laws applicable to people with The revisions to the city's codes will probably involve language that will remove barriers fbj housing with people with disabilities to locating in residential neighborhopds, said G. Eugene Neil, Sedona's assistant city attorney. "I think witp the change of the ordinance we will be better able to adress the application4 when they come in,' he said. The city will probably dispose of the property at public auction, he said. Asked if settlement represents a victory for the hostile neighbors, Mr. Neil i it as "a resolution of the situation." -------------------------------------------- - ------ ------- ------ -- - - - - - - ------ -- - --- display&pageID =3294 Ei d S690Z9L09LI 0931a NUS N0NO3NUN 7/25/2004 d20:90 bD 92 Inc National Fair Housing yy Na Ad Flews Archive - Old Headlines Press Releases _ Print Advocate Action Alerts Discussion Message Forums the Guest Room — Resources Get Help Near You Events Job Ustings Links Book Club Sponsors .—Legal Research Case Database Recovery Database HUD Settlements - Statutes and Regs Articles HUD Resources httpWwww. co Online Page I of I A proje[t of the Tennessee fair Housing Council .onat Fair Housing search: ovate onflne :90 Home about NFHAO forums 90 to advanced search t 1 I � search fiefp < us decries discrimination against (BO ON, May 12, 2003) A national policy panel said that people with add M alcohol and other drugs face widespread stigma and discrimination in trying to access treatment and achieve recovery, Alcoholism & Drug Abuse Weekly reported April 21. Acco ing to the Join Together policy -panel report, people with addiction face numero obstacles in obtaining health insurance, appropriate medical care, emplo nt, public benefits, education and training programs, and housing. 'We ope the report will raise awareness of the subtle and not-so - subtle effects of legaliz discrimination," said Anara Guard, a spokesperson for)oin Together. 'People i recovery or in treatment should not be subjected to legally imposed barriers sed solely on addiction." -- FULL STORY by_Jo)ntogether _ org 1546 I yI•d 96902BL09L1 D93I9 NHS WDWO08UR 7/25/2004 11 • dZ0 =90 40 9Z InC • National Fair Housing Advom& Online Page 1 of 2 i 1 sl-d The requirep retrofits include improvements such as ramping the front and rear steps of rh apartments; adding accessible parking spaces; installing grab bars in bathrooms; lowering thermostats, medicine cabinets and closet racks to accessible heights; an expanding the amount of clear space in kitchens to allow for wheelchair aneuverability. In addition to the retrofits, The Habitat Company is regal ed to ubm it semiannual written reports on Nhe status of the accessibility retrofits an the modifications to Access ^ring. Further, The Habitat Company is required to ndude language regarding their commitment to accessible design and constructio in all future requests for funding for the development of public housing. Th settlement agreement also Includes extensive monitoring by Access Living of an future covered multifamily dwellings developed, built, or overseen by Th e Habitat omoanv. The accessi a design and construction requirements of the FHAA apply to all covered ssi ifamily dwellings of four or more units (public or private) built for first occupancy cil or after March 13, 1991. If the building has an elevator, the Act mandates th t the common areas and every unit be usable by people with disabilities. If there is no elevator, the common areas and all first floor units must ?!25/2004 1 d20:90 40 92 Inc 96902BL09LI 093IO NHS HOW03NUM A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Councif 4 search; Nat onal Fair Housing - 90: search 3une -July 2003 onI/ Adv cate Online n NFHAO Home J about INFHAO I forums i go to advanced < Contae us s ear ch ?ar help < help — News Archive - Old Headlines Chic go Housing Authority will pay . Press Releases . $32 ,000 in damages and retrofits to settle Prim Advocate Action Alerts aeee s complaints — Discussion - Message Forums The Guest Room Low -into a disabled residents of Chicago will have expanded housing choice as a result of settlement agreement between Access Living of Chicago and the Chicago — Resources - Housing uthority (CHA) along with The Habitat Company. The $325,000 Get Help Near You settlem reached in February, resolves allegations that Phase I of a new public Events housing p ciect in Chicago was designed and constructed without accessibility for Job Listings Persons th disabilities, In violation of the accessibility provisions of the Fair Links Housing endments Act (FHAA) of 1988 and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 1 Book Club Sponsors The apart ents are part of one of Chicago's largest public housing complexes, Henry Ho er Homes. The settlement agreement mandates up to $300,000 In —Legal Research - retroFlttin to remedy the inaccessible features of the property, including nine Case Database exterior r ofits and ten retrofits on the interior of the units. Attorney Jeff Taren of • Recovery Database Kinoy, Tar n and Geraghty and lawyers With Access Livings Civil Rights Team negotiat the settlement, which also includes $25,000 In attorneys fees and HUD Settlements - damages. Statutes and Recs Articles According o Taren, no official complaint or lawsuit was filed. Access living was able HUD Resources to negotia the settlement prior to taking administrative action or filing a lawsuit. Access Livi g was also able to ensure that future public housing units meet visitabifity tandards so that disabled visitors can get into the housing units of I public hou ing residents. Interior a d exterior defects will be rixed i 1 sl-d The requirep retrofits include improvements such as ramping the front and rear steps of rh apartments; adding accessible parking spaces; installing grab bars in bathrooms; lowering thermostats, medicine cabinets and closet racks to accessible heights; an expanding the amount of clear space in kitchens to allow for wheelchair aneuverability. In addition to the retrofits, The Habitat Company is regal ed to ubm it semiannual written reports on Nhe status of the accessibility retrofits an the modifications to Access ^ring. Further, The Habitat Company is required to ndude language regarding their commitment to accessible design and constructio in all future requests for funding for the development of public housing. Th settlement agreement also Includes extensive monitoring by Access Living of an future covered multifamily dwellings developed, built, or overseen by Th e Habitat omoanv. The accessi a design and construction requirements of the FHAA apply to all covered ssi ifamily dwellings of four or more units (public or private) built for first occupancy cil or after March 13, 1991. If the building has an elevator, the Act mandates th t the common areas and every unit be usable by people with disabilities. If there is no elevator, the common areas and all first floor units must ?!25/2004 1 d20:90 40 92 Inc 96902BL09LI 093IO NHS HOW03NUM National Fair Housing Online Page 2 of 2 be usab e. The Rehabilitation Act requires, with respect to new public housing, that commoq areas be accessible, five percent of the apartments be accessible to tenants . ith mobility disabilities and two percent be accessible to tenants with hearing Or vision disabilities. public housing units are critical to persons with disabilities AccxcJ4 to Karen Tamley, Access Living's Director of Programs, "A large percen a of persons with disabilities are low- income and need accessible, affordab housing. Because such housing is virtually nonexistent in the private sector, I w -income tenants with disabilities rely heavily on public housing. It is therefo critical that new public housing developments, like Henry Horner Homes, be built nsistent with federal civil rights laws that ensure access." Staffed W a majority of people with disabilities, Access Living is Chicago's Center for Indepprident Living. Access Living works toward the full equality, inclusion and empowertnent of people with disabilities. For more information about th5 or other Access li ing cases, contact Gary Arnold at (312) 253 -7000. orals hou Housing disability to an April 2003 report by the National Fair Housing Alliance, 27 percent ing complaints flied in 2002 were based on disability. HUD's Office or Fair id Equal Opportunity reported that it took more complaints based on han any other type. - ---- ----------------------------------------- ---------------------------------------------- • • • 7/25/2004 1 093I0 NUS 1,101,103buw 460 :90 b0 9Z Tor 91.d SG90ZBL09Li "i am very rurious as to how it was resolved, said Kale Williams, executive director of the Lead rship Council for Metropolitan Open Communities. "I think it was a mistake th *_ the settlement V4as sealed." In a teleph •ne conversation Monday, Williams explained that the settlement is one of the large�t amounts in housing bias suits, probably the largest made to a "It would ti in the top ten in size of settlements of fair housing around the country," said Williams, who spoke to Evanstonians Saturday about the need for affirmative gional marketing of housing for minorities. "I think wh4e a public body is involved, it is inappropriate for it not to be public information,T Williams said. The three -y r suit arose from a testing audit by the Interfaith Housing Center of the Northerril Suburbs, not from the direct complaint of a prospective renter /home buyer. Owen Thoma , executivousine director of Evanston's Human Relations Commission, which enforc the fair hg ordinance, would not comment directly on the h p: ui:housi ng. ,mJiade c'. ? met ". d= page.display &pageLT' =3452 7!25/2004 LI'd S890ZBL09Li D93I0 NHS N01,100210N dE0:90 bO 92 inC National Fair Housing Advoca a Online Page 1 oft A project of the Tennesseg Fair Housing CouncrY '. • 1 search: Nat onal Fair blousing �! Advocate Online search September 1992 only NFHAO Home j about NFHAO ! forums I " go to advanced search < eonta us search help < — News Archive Old Headlines Sett ement's legal costs pegged at $300,000 . Press Releases . }Iome > Nevvs Archive > The Advocate > September 1992 Print Advocate Action Alerts Although a federal judge sealed settlement terms Feb. 28 In the city's housing — Discussion, discrimin tion suit against Baird & Warner Inc., the city received $450,000 the . Message Forums same da The Guest Room 'The $45 ,000 has been deposited into the general fund," said city finance director Bob Shon . — Resources Get Help Near You Consider general revenue, as are fines, taxes and licenses, the money will help Events pay for g neral services such as fire and police, he said. Job Listings _ Links book Clijb According to the office of Herbert Hill, the dty's first corporate counsel, legal fees Sponsors paid to th Chicago firm of Keck, Mahin & Cate to wage the three -year lawsuit- - amounted to $300,000. —Legal Research Case Database Band & W rner is one of five real estate agencies charged in February 1989 with • Recovery Database violating E anston's fair housing laws. The city pursued two of those cases, settling with Cent ry 21 Shoreline in 1990 for $200,000. HUD Settlements - Statutes and Regs At the Eva ston Neighborhood Conference Saturday a Chicago open housing Articles advocate q estioned the 30 -month seal on the lawsuit settlement terms, to which HUD Resources the city ag eed. "i am very rurious as to how it was resolved, said Kale Williams, executive director of the Lead rship Council for Metropolitan Open Communities. "I think it was a mistake th *_ the settlement V4as sealed." In a teleph •ne conversation Monday, Williams explained that the settlement is one of the large�t amounts in housing bias suits, probably the largest made to a "It would ti in the top ten in size of settlements of fair housing around the country," said Williams, who spoke to Evanstonians Saturday about the need for affirmative gional marketing of housing for minorities. "I think wh4e a public body is involved, it is inappropriate for it not to be public information,T Williams said. The three -y r suit arose from a testing audit by the Interfaith Housing Center of the Northerril Suburbs, not from the direct complaint of a prospective renter /home buyer. Owen Thoma , executivousine director of Evanston's Human Relations Commission, which enforc the fair hg ordinance, would not comment directly on the h p: ui:housi ng. ,mJiade c'. ? met ". d= page.display &pageLT' =3452 7!25/2004 LI'd S890ZBL09Li D93I0 NHS N01,100210N dE0:90 bO 92 inC National Fair Housing Adva:afe Online Page 2 of sealed • "People hould have the right to know, but the judge ruled on it and that's that,' Thomas aid. 'It's a done deal." Before qe case was dosed, Thomas noted a nationwide problem of "treating minoriti s as second -class citizens." "I'm talking about job discrimination and housing discrimination," he said. "Race relptions in Evanston need to be improved." But discrimination, he said, is not alwa "all black and white." Calling fcr'greater sensitivity,' Thomas said discrimination encompasses Hispanic and othet ethnic groups. "I think t e beauty about our situation in Evanston is that historically, we have always h d the wherewithal to address these issues." The court seal was lifted later. The city said, "the Evanston Human Relations Commissi n is vigilant in its efforts to protect and enforce the rights of all individual to equal housing opportunities. The Evanston Fair Housing Ordinance reflects commitment of Evanston's citizens and City Council to maintain open housing Oroughout our community'. • • 7/25/2004 BI'd S6902BL09LI 093I0 NHS NONOOaHN d{.0 :90 40 92 Inc National Fair Housing Advoeat4 Online Pagel of 3 Discussion Message Forums the Guest Room A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Council search: nal Fair Housing ;g :ate Online search Press Releases only El ; about NFHAO ; forums ; Sedona Settles Housing tination Complaint is Archive > Press Releases RELEASE: go to advanced search < search held < — Resources- (Tucson) (Phoenix) Get Help Near You Diana Ch Nati .. __.:r. Adv Director of Litigation & ce Works Fellow NFHAO Arizona C contact - News Archive law Old Headlines City Press Releases _ DISCI Print Advocate Action Alerts Koine > Discussion Message Forums the Guest Room A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Council search: nal Fair Housing ;g :ate Online search Press Releases only El ; about NFHAO ; forums ; Sedona Settles Housing tination Complaint is Archive > Press Releases RELEASE: go to advanced search < search held < — Resources- (Tucson) (Phoenix) Get Help Near You Diana Ch Andrew M. Mudryk Events Equal 3u Director of Litigation & ce Works Fellow Job Listings . Arizona C ter for Disability Advocary Links law Arizona Center for Disability Club (520) 327 Law 9547 Sponsors 602) 274 -6287 -Legal Research - CITY F SEDONA SETTLES HOUSING DISCRIMINATION COMPLAINT Case Database Recovery Database • ( SEDONA, dz., July 14, 2003} -- Recently, the City of Sedona agreed to settle a housing d aWinination complaint, brought by Recovery Alternatives, Inc. and Anne HUD Settlements - Cunningha , its Executive Director, both represented by the Arizona Center for Statutes and Regs Disability Law (the Center). The January 2003 administrative complaint, filed with Articles the Arizon Attorney General's Office, alleged that the City violated the Arizona Fair HUD Resources Housing when its Land Development Code thwarted efforts of a group home for individuals ith disabilities from operating in a Sedona residential neighborhood. Recovery ternatives and Ms. Cunningham sought to establish a group home designed t he{p individuals, who have ceased using controlled substances, recover from addi ion and begin anew. After purchasing a house in Sedona's Kachina Subdiv{sm obtaining all necessary state licenses, and completing significant renpvation on the property, the group home ran into a road block when the City of Sedona sect to permit operation until the City issued a Conditional Use Permit (CUP). "Lin er the federal and state Fair Housing Acts, people who are addicted to alcohol or ntrolled substances but who are not currently using are considered individuals ith disabilities and are protected from discrimination, " stated Diana Chen, one big attorneys at the Arizona Center Ear Disatility law (the Center) rep sensing Pecovery Alternatives, Inc. and Ms. Cunningham. "This means municipaliti4 like Sedona can't make it more burdensome for people with disabilities to live in the neighborhood of their choice," explained Chen. In Nov em r 2002, the Center was contacted by iris. Cunningham when the group homes ad inistra[ors were experiencing problems with Sedona land use provisions that requirET group homes to obtain a CUP before operation. The City originally classified th home as a "group dwelling" subject to a public notification and a citizenship rticipation process. Therefore, according to the Sedona Land DE 'Opme Code, Recovery Alternatives was required to notify all land owners . within 300 f [ of the property and endure a citizen participation process before the City would c nsider granting the CUP. h-p- VAM.fa,rheusi .ca nil sdex. fri? uethod— dis i ..r. r roc 7,1251100A �"F g ;age. p. , page,rJ -3 a r dLS SD bD 9Z inC }'d 96902BL09LT 003Ia WUS WOW0D21HN National Fair Housing Advocat4 online Page 2 of ° .ogditi al Use Permits are commonly used by municipalities to deal with property usages at are out of character for their immediate surroundings," said Andrew Mudryk, Director of litigation and Advocacy at the Center, also repre senting the complain nts. Mudryk further explained, "But here, Recovery Alternatives wanted to open home in a residentially zoned area where the residents would live as a family. S), the proposed use was consistent with the zoning. Attaching burdensome terms an I conditions like the notification and public hearing requirements on group homes vi fates fair housing !aws. Further, the City should have waived the CUP requirem nt as a reasonable accommodation under the FHA when asked to do so.- "Requirin a CUP for a group home only Invites opposition from neighbors often fueled by irrational fear of people with disabilities. That's exactly what happened here. Nei hbors in the Kachina Subdivision vehemently campaigned against granting a CUP," added Chen. BY Nove ber 2002, the City, buckling under pressure from angry neighbors, had tabled co sideration of the CUP application, delaying operation of the group home and causi g severe financial losses to Recovery Alternatives. With the Center's assistant , a charge of housing discrimination against the City of Sedona was filed with the izona Attorney General's Office in January 2003. The charge alleged that the City f iled to offer a waiver of the CUP requirement as a reasonable accorn.mot lation for individuals with disabilities mandated under the state's Fair Housing A . It further alleged that land use provisions requiring a CUP for group homes serving persons with disabilities is itself a violation of fair housing laws because it imposes more burdensome terms and conditions on persons with disabilitiesl looking for housing. In May, al parties entered settlement negotiations, with the Arizona Civil Rights Division o the Attorney General's Office. The parties successfully reached a settlemen on June 26, 2003. In exchange for Recovery Alternatives and Ms. Cunningh agreeing to dismiss the complaint and relinquish their right to file a • formal la uit, Sedona agreed to the following: • Perl rianently post a disclaimer in Sedona City Hall which states that disc imination on the basis of race, color, reiigion, sex, national origin, fam !al status, or disability is prohibited • con ene a study session of its Planning Commission in consultation with the Ceni er within 120 days of the agreement to consider revisions and ame dments to the land Development Code and other City codes regarding placement of group homes and the City's obligation and duties under the fede I and state Fair Housing Acts and other laws applicable to people with disallilities • offed a Fair Housing training session to City staff working on housing issues • purc ase complainant's property intended for the group home for a sum of $381,000.00 • pay I settlement amount of $148,334.00, which included attorneys fees and cOstl to the Center In exchang , Anne Cunningham and Recovery Alternatives will delay attempts to open a grOt p home in a Sedona residential neighborhood for one year while the City works revise its Code. "We hope n ws of this case will incite other municipalities in Arizona to review their city or coun ordinances regarding group homes for people with disabilities and make what ver changes are necessary to ensure that everyone gets an equal Opportunity to housing," said Chen. The Arizon i Center for Disability taw provides free legl services to ensure people witi I a wide range of disabilities are free from diascrimination abuse ron;/ index.¢; rll ?method==page.d;spiay&pagelI--32S5 7ii5 /2004 S -d S6902BL06LI 003I9 NHS NDNDONUN dBS =SD bD 92 inr • National Fair Housing Advoca* Online Page 3 of 3 9•d and n lect, and have access to education, housing, jobs, health rare, and other ices. The Center assists Individuals statewide through federal prot on and advocacy funding along with other granLS and donations. The Ce does not charge clients for its services. For furth r information or a copy of the Complaint or Conciliation and Settlement Agreem ts, contact Diana Chen at (520) 327 -9547 or Andrew Mudryk at (602) 274 -628 . tra S6902BL09LI display &page1D =3295 093Ia NUS HOW038UH 7/25/2004 dBS:SO 40 92 IBC National Fair Housing Advocat Online Page I of A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Councir • II , Nati search: nat Fair Housing A 'V sate Online search [larch 2003 only l_4 NFNAO ome I about NFHAO I forums go to advanced search < COi9taet s search help < — News Archive - Old Headlines Dayt na Beach group home continues Press Releases . oper tion and wins $100,000 settlement Print Advocate Action A!erts after attempted sh utdown — Discussion - . Message Forums the Guest Room The City mmisslon of Daytona Beach, Florida agreed in March to give up a yearlong ght against a home for recovering drug and alcohol addicts. The City will — Resources pay $100, 00 to settle a federal discrimination lawsuit. Get Help Near You Events The settle ent approved by commissioners includes $60,000 for attorney fees and Job Listings . costs. Mic gel Gardner, owner of the home, will split $6,000 with 10 clients. Links Hearthsto a Foundation, a nonprofit company that operates the home, will get Book Club $34,000. a settlement ensures that the Peabody House, a group recovery home Sponsors in a beach ide Daytona residential neighborhood, will continue to operate and help up to 10 r covering alcoholics and drug addicts simultaneously. -Legal Research Case Database The Comm ssion's move came despite opposition from neighbors who opposed the • Recovery Database group hom and spoke out at Commission meetings over the past year. According to the Da ona Beach News- Joumat, Commissioners approved the settlement on a HUD Settlements - 4-3 vote w th support from Mayor Bud Asher and commissioners Rick Shiver, Statutes and Regs Yvonne riett- Golden and Charles Cherry. Commissioners Darlene Yordon, Mike Articles Shallow an George Burden opposed the settlement. HUD Resources Neighbor wanted "illegal dormitory" shutdown According the News- 3oumat, city officials started a code enforcement action against the home that resulted in fines for operating an "illegal dormitory" in a residential rea and ordered the home to shut down. The actions were at the urging of neighbo , according to the article. The group t ome's operators refused to dose the home and filed a federal lawsuit under the F 3ir Housing Act and the Americans with Disabilities Act, asserting that the City was discriminating against the Peabody House residents on the basis of disability. S -even Polin, an attorney with Oxford House, another group home operator, a fisted Hearthstone with its lawsuit. Commission r Scarlett- Golden told the News - Journal that the City had no alternative . to settle. "Do we continue spending money trying to win when we know our pr babilities of winning are almost nil ?" she asked. Commissioner Yordon continued 0 side with neighbors of the home who oppose it. "The neighborhood has made it Pea. they don't want to resole this, they ::ant to fight," Yordon told the News-'•g gnat The rhetoric against the home had been harsh as evidenced by anti - Peabody posts on therealda ona.com web site, operated by "Citizens for Honest Government." • The site acct the home's owner of simpiy viewing the home as a money- making endeavor in ead of a place to helg people in recovery. The site's creator also http: / /www.fairhousing.com /index. ? method= page.display &pageID =3387 7/25/2004 d6S =S0 b0 9Z inC L-d S690ZBL09L1 0931Q NHS NON092UN National Fair Housing Advoea4 Online Page 2 of 2 stated, " ow call me nuts, but my definitfon of disabled does not extend to someon who chooses to suck on a crack pipe. That is an insult to all the truly • disabled ople out there who struggle to meet life's challenges. Lets (sic) just hope so federal judge sees this for what it is ... a big scam (sic).° At City C mmission meetings, neighbors of the Peabody House claimed that [ransien and panhandlers had increased in the neighborhood since the home opened, hat drug addicts and alcoholics were not really disabled, that the house should moved to some other part of the city, that too many cars were parked at he hou ,and that the house generated mob revenue than ether rental homes in the neigh orhood. Peabody Pouse representatives responded that there were never more than four cars at thp home, all of which fit into the home's garage. They pointed to the fact that therq was a garden club in the neighborhood with 250 members and held bi- weekly m ings which caused a great number of additional cars to be parked in the neighborhood. In granti a preliminary injunction to Peabody House to stop the City from shutting ii down, a federal judge noted that City Commissioners had claimed that recoverin. addicts and alcoholics were not disabled. The judge denied that assertion, saying that addiction "places severe limitations on people's lives" and pointed tc several other federal cases that expressed the same sentiment. The settle ent agreement reached with the City resolves the claims of both parties. A ording to Polin, one of the Plaintiffs attorneys, the City agreed to treat Peabody House as a "single family home' as long as the home continues to follow all the reg lations and codes required of such homes. • Gardner . City of Daytona Beach Case No. :02 -CV- 357- ORL -I9KRS (M.D. Fla.) The Hono able Patricia C. Fawcett, U.S. District Judge Stever: P lin and Billie Jo Owens, attorneys for plaintiff Case file.. March 22, 2002 Settleme t: March 19, 2003 •h l ^.ln�.:2I) CUS" ^h.eOIZIiT ie fm ?rieLh pabe.d splay &e ?T3 3387 712:12004 d6SiS0 B•d 96902BL09LT 003I9 NHS HOW03NUN 40 9Z Inc National Fair Housing Advoca�e Online Page 1 of 2 f! A project of the Tennessee Fair Housing Council Nat onai Fair Housing < earth,, Ad locate Online a search)uly 1995 on'y 0. NFHA Home I about RFHAO j forums co m aallarced search < contac us search help < ideays Arc: ^.ire' Old Headlines Frid ey Tenants and City Settle Press Releasas Print int Advoocate cate . Disc imination and Relocation Claims For Action Alerts $40 x000 Discussion Message Forums Tenants i a complex in Fridley, MN, stated for demolition to make way for new The Guest Room housing ave settled their claims under the Fair Housing Act, the Minnesota Human Rights A , and laws on relocation benefits. — Resources - Get Help Near You Events )ob Listings . Links nook Club Sponsors —Legal Research Case Database Recovery Database HUD Settlements - Statute5 and Regs Articles HUD Resources s - d Tenants #eged that their buildings were targeted for demolition because of their race, Pam liat status, and receipt of public assistance. After weeks of intensive negatfat ns between the Sylvan Oaks Tenants Association (SOTA), the City of Fridley, H ofFiciatS. and their attorneys, a settlement was reached in June. Under the terms of the settlement, the City and HRA deny any liability or intent to dt, _nr to to against SOTA members, but have paid approximately $400,000 in relocation payments and atto mays fees and have agreed to enact a fair housing ordinance for the City. The City also agreed not to require any local residency preferencq for subsidized housing in Fridley, and to amend the City's housing plan to take into account the needs of low -i ncome tenants. Glenn D. fiver, lead attomey for the case with the Housing Discrimination Law Project Sal ;"The thirty plus clients we represent now have the means to make real Choi about where they want to live. Some of them are now building homes in Fridley, h ile others have chosen to relocate in areas outside of Fridley. At the same time we believe that the City of Fridley and its HRA in Fridley understand that they nnot undertake redevelopment policies without considering the needs Of the disp aced fa mil ies." Oliver poin ed out that SOTA's complaint, which was never filed in Court, hinged on two facto . One, there were statements by public officials which indicated that condemnin SO -A members' apartment buildings and redeveloping the area (using tax increm ent financing) was intended to displace the tenants because of their socio -econ mic status. (Half were people of color, half receive Public assistance of some form Ord two thirds of the households contained families with children, all protected c assific ations under Federal and /or State anti - discrimination law.) Secondly the proposed demolition of the apartment buildings would have forced many families of color to relocate outside the City of Fridley and reduced the overall availability f low income housing in Fridley. SOTA stated, based on an Urban Coalition an lysis of census data, that the project would displace 5% of Fridley's people of c for. The demolition of the apartment buildings without adequate relocation a istance was bound to further segregate the population of Fridley, by forcing peo le of col or and other protected class persons out of the City. • • The tenants were represented by the Legai Aid Society of Minneapolis Housing DiscriminaYi n Law Project, Dorsey & Whitney, and other private attorneys. Thomas J. White, a Ofunteer attorney from the law firm of Klein & White, who worked on the case, titled the unity of the SOTA residents, assistance of volunteer attorneys • and the will'ngness of Fridley public oilciats to come to the table for serious negotiations las reasons for the relatively quick resolution of the dispute. com/index.afm ?method —page. display &pageID =3152 7/25/2004 sssoal1,09L1 093iu ueS HON0021UN dDDrsD vo sz 1117 National Fair Housing Advocat� Online Page 2 of 2 the resid nts Mat [heybelieved that [he project was permissible under [he law and • th at the roject was a grouphome. not a nursino home. The residents continued to express air strong opposition tothe project. [Later that month. the City orderetl [he con lion crews to stop worfc on [hegroup home and revoked the building permits i had granted. National Fair Housing Advocat4 Online Page 1 of 2 A project of the rennesseg Fair Housing CounC17 f{ tVati nat Fair Housing search:. _ ice; �( AdV cafe Online search September l9aeonly NFHAO ome ; about NFHAO j forums C 0o to advanced search < contact us search help < News Archive Old Headlines Judg orders city to pay $192,000 to Press Releases . Miss uri group home operators in zoning Print Advocate Action Alerts disp to L..c> rats i. :_ :i >- .._.._.._o'e'_' >S Discussion Message Forums The Guest Room In Sept ber, United States District Judge George F. Gunn, Jr. ordered the city of ' Crevecoe r. Missouri [o pay $ 192.788 to the developers of a group home for persons w MAlzhelmer's Disease. The Court also ordered the city to issue building — Resources - permits to thedevelopers so the group home could be completed - Get Help Near You Events Job Listings In June 1 S. CUBA. Inc. opened Ma5onManor. a group home for persons with - Links Alzheimer Disease. in an unincorporated part of St.Louis County. Missouri. Soon Book C!ub • after the f cility opened. the part of the county where thehome was built was Sponsors annexed b the city of Crave Coeur. CURA planned to build another grouphome in the Creve oeur area because Mere were many people on the waiting list to getinto Mason Ma or. _ —Legal Research' Case Database In Septem r 1995. CURA purchased a home in a Creve Coeur residential Recovery Database neighborh andplanned to convert it into a group home. Later that month, CURA applied to he city forseveral construction permits. On October 4. 1995. Timothy HUD Settlements ' Dotan. pr ident of CUBA. metwith Creve Coeues director of Community Statutes and Pegs Developm C Randal Gamer. Gamer told Dolanthat the city's legal department was Articles eking t see if it could block the group homebased on an earlier court decision. HUD Resources CURA crea d a separate. non -profit corporation to insulate itself fromthe earlier wurt deck n which held that cities could block the construction of grouphomes in residential re.as if they were "for profit" ventures. CURA assured theCity Attorney that the ne home would be a non -profit operation. This assurance Seemed tosatish/ t^ City, which issued several co:sin:cticr. permits in October and November 995. City revokes permits after neighbors voice concerns In Decem r 1995. residents near the new group home learned of CURA's plans. TMey �r:� d Gar..er and Michael MCDor+e :l. [he City Administrator for Cre:'e Coeur. The. --ghbcrs claimed that they had been told that the home was being modified fol a singlefamily from another town. The neighbors said that they did not want a "nu inghome" operating in a residential area. The neighbors complained that their prppertyvalues would be driven down and that there would be additional trathc in thelmelghborhood if the project was allowed to proceed. According to testimony. none of theneighbors ever specifically objected to having disabled persons living in theimeighborhood. On Decemb r 11. 1995. the Crave Coeur City Council held a regularly scheduled . meeting.Matly residents of the neighborhood where the group home was being built attended th eeting. They expressed their concerns about the group home and the adverse effeds itwouid have on their neighborhood. The City Council explained to ..h..N1/'.t ^vVi.fai :hoar -&Com/ir.d4 t?method= page.dE;p :ay&page.D =3 ^53 725/2044 g -d S690Z8LO9L1 093I0 "us I:IOI:IOO?lul:l dL5 =50 40 9Z Inc Facsimile Mail 9095968691 Phone (626) 3391432 Mayor, City Council Members of Newport Beach, CA Facsimile Mail 9496443073 July 26, 2004 "RECEIVED AFTER AGENDA PRINTED." h q R- ;t ?-,) y Re: July 27, 2004 Agenda Item ;#1 Adoption of proposed Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance for Recovery Facilities Gentlemen: We have owned 1816 West Oceanfront sinee 1967. We have used it as our vacation single family residence all this time. In 1992 we remodeled and added a two bedroom apartment over the garage. The present resident, there for the last three years, is a single lady. We are certainly aware of the usage and occupants conduct at 1810 West Oceanfront. We visit with our friends at 1812 West Oceanfront. At times the noise and the smoke emanating from 1810, is in our opinion, consttutes both a public and a private nuisance. You must realize that there is only a three foot side yard set back in all of that area We therefore support and urge you to adopt the proposed Zoning Ordinance Amendment • and also require a hearing before issuing conditional use pemut, requiring the occupants to abide by reasonable and non discriminatory restrictions. We do expect that these conditions of occupancy be compatible with the usage contemplated when the original zoning of R- 2.5 was passed_ Since all these hearings the recovery facility has been a much better neighbor. However, in addition to their permanent residents they are busing in several van loads of people daily at around 8 A.M. and picking them up in the evening about 9 P.M. The food supplies come in at least twice a week. The trash company empties two large dumpsters three a week. All this impacts the traffic flow in the narrow alley serving Ocean Front and Balboa residents. All of these things should be considered and the permittee should be held responsible to the standards of the other area neighbors. Nothing less, nothing more. In doing v hat's fair and reasonable I hope that each Council and Staff member will approach this problem as though the recovery facility is their neighbor and not just ours. Very truly yours, John and Margie Mordoff L • • Mr. And Mrs. Albert Irwin 1802 West Ocean Front Newport Beach, California July 26, 2004 City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, Ca, Re: Agenda Item No.4 —July 27, 2004 Dear Mayor Ridgway and Councilmen: _0 "RECEIVED AFTE AAGENDA PUNTED:" 2K y I'� -q-0 Although we are unable to be present at your meeting, we wish to express our support for the proposed zoning amendment regarding Recovery Facilities. Please pass this amendment. • As long time residents of the Peninsula, we have personally experienced the difficulties that can occur when Group Living facilities are too densely located and poorly managed. Sincerely, Al and Lois Irwin E COUNCR AGENDA NO 16 8 lo o I LAW OFFICES OF FACSIMILE TELEPHONE (949) 752 -2141 DANIEL M H S� •.CARL T ON (949) 757 -0707 • IRVINE, CALIFORNIA 92812 Legal Assistant Heather Dorris July 26, 2004 HAND DELIVERED City Council City of Newport Beach 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA 92658 Re: July 27, 2004 Council Meeting — Agenda Item 4 Dear Mayor Ridgeway and City Council Members: This correspondence confirms that this office represents Narconon Southern California. A review of the proposed ordinance raises.concerns that portions thereof are in violation of state and federal statutory and case law, as it is currently written. It is in • the best interest and welfare of the community for the Council to consider making at least two additional amendments to the final draft. The amendments will clarify the definitions for "Campus" and "Single Housekeeping Unit." The proposed changes are presented below. They will allow the City to maintain the desired control and also allow the ordinance to be more compliant with the laws of the land. Why do these definitions need to be amended? The answer is clear after a brief review of the federal and state legislative purpose for the laws, along with citations of a few of the applicable laws. Legislative Intent And The Concerns The Federal Housing Act Amendment (FHAA) was partly created to make unlawful those public and private land use and housing practices and decisions that discriminated against people with disabilities, as defined by the government. In particular, the act was passed to eliminate unlawful restrictions against group housing for these people since they are significantly more likely to live with unrelated persons within a residential setting. Under the FHAA it is illegal to refuse "to make reasonable accommodations in • rules, policies, practices or services, when such accommodations may be necessary to afford such person equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling." 42 U.S.C. §3604(f). City Council City of Newport July 27, 2004 Page 2 u To comply with the federal laws on a state -wide basis, the California legislature passed laws to establish and maintain a comprehensive way to ensure quality community care for people with disabilities. This allowed them to live in group housing within a residential neighborhood setting (California Health and Safety Code section 1501). As a result, a concern was created by local agencies about compliance with the federal and state laws. They believed the integrity of a residential neighborhood would be impaired and an over - concentration of residential care facilities would be created because state law requires these group residential facilities be treated as Single Family Residences (California Health and Safety Code section 1568.0831). To deal with this concern, state law allows the establishment for a separation distance of 300 feet or less (California Health and Safety Code section 1520.5 subsection (a) and (b). This requirement clearly shows the need to change the distance from "300 yards" to "300 feet" in the distance requirement of the proposed definition for "Campus." The other area of concern is the fact that the word "transient" was not 100% stricken and removed from the proposed ordinance as discussed in the City Council • hearing of July 13, 2004. A form of the word still appears in the definition for "Single . Housekeeping Unit" as "non- transient" which limits persons with disabilities in the unit. In reality, a family can have transient members. So can residential properties that are leased, rented, or have multi - ownership. The use of the word needs to be eliminated because it violates legislative intent, discriminates against the handicapped, and fails to provide equal protection. Further, the use of the term "Single Housekeeping Unit" as written does not allow a reasonable accommodation and conflicts by operation with the term's use in the FEP requirements of "SECTION.I0.C.2." of the proposed ordinance. In City of Edmonds v. Oxford House, 514 US 725 (1995), the City of Edmonds, Washington had a zoning restriction which limited occupancy to five or fewer unrelated persons. The District Court had granted summary judgment in favor of the city based upon a provision in the Fair Housing Act which exempts local restrictions regarding the maximum number of persons permitted to occupy a dwelling from any discrimination challenges. The Ninth Circuit reversed the District Court decision and the United States Supreme Court agreed. Hence, occupancy restrictions apply equally to families and groups of unrelated persons. In addition, the California Supreme Court in City of Santa Barbara v. Adamson, 27 Cal. 3d 123 (1980), held that the California Constitution prohibited local communities • from distinguishing between blood- related families and self - proclaimed families that were living as a single housekeeping unit. E City Council City of Newport July 27, 2004 Page 3 Other case law affecting persons occupying a residential dwelling include: Briseno v. Santa Ana, 6 Cal.App. 4th 1378 (4th Dist. 1992), where the City of Santa Ana had enacted local regulations which limited the number of persons (related or unrelated) living together. The state Court of Appeal held that the local regulation was preempted by the uniform state regulation and legislation; and In College Area Renters and Landlord Association v. City of San Diego, 43 Cal.App. 4th 677 (4th Dist. 1996), the City of San Diego attempted to limit the number of . adult occupants of rented one - family dwelling units. The Court of Appeal held the zoning invalid as a denial of equal protection of renters vis -a -vis owners. So, one solution for the City is to clarify the definition of "Single Housekeeping Unit" for purposes of the FEP and allow unrelated persons to function together under the definition of a "Residential Care — General" and in accordance with legislative intent and federal and state laws: The above represents a couple of concerns we have with the proposed ordinance. We have provided you with some additional facts to help in.your creating an ordinance that complies with state and federal laws by amending the definitions involved and to eliminate the conflict that exists. • Thank you for your consideration in addressing these concerns. Respectfu , l C. CARITON DCC:td cc: Jon Stearman, Narconcon Southern California (via facsimile) Robert Burnham, Newport Beach City Attorney (via facsimile) Jeffrey A. Goldfarb, Special Counsel to City of Newport Beach (via facsimile) • • "RE�Ei ED AFTER AGENDA N^F1C9 NON° Southern California August 7, 2003 L PURPOSE OF ADA - The following excerpts are from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Bay Area Addiction Research and Treatment Inc v. City of Antioch,CA 1999: • Congress' stated purposes in enacting the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) also support its application to zoning. Within the text of the ADA, Congress set forth its broad goal of "providing a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities" 42 U.S.C. Section 1210(b)(1) (1999) "individuals with disabilities are a discrete and insular minority who have been faced with restrictions and limitations, subjected to a history of purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated to a position of political powerlessness in our society, based on characteristics that are beyond the control of such individuals and resulting from stereotypic assumptions not truly indicative of the individual ability of such individuals to participate in, and contribute to, society." Without speculating on the kind and quality of evidence needed to establish a significant risk, we note that in assessing the evidence, courts must be mindful to the ADA's express goal of eliminating discrimination against people with disabilities. See 42 U.S.C. Section1210(b)(1) As the Arline Court recognized, the Rehabilitation Act was meant to protect disabled individuals "from deprivations based on prejudice, stereotypes, or unfounded fear." 2. INTENTION OF FHAA - The following excerpts are from The Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District, Jeffery Hall v. Butte Home Health, 1997: In amending the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Legislature declared: "It is the Legislature's intent to make the following findings and declarations regarding unlawful housing practices prohibited by this act: [P] (a) That public and private land use practices, decisions, and authorizations have restricted, in residentially zoned areas, the establishment and operation of • 1810 W. Ocean Front, Newport Beach, CA Phone. (800) 876 -6378 Fax (949) 675-0379 www.usnodrucs.com n f7 T City of Newport Beach Mayor & City Council t 3300 Newport Blvd. Newport Beach, CA ? _ v., SUBJECT: City Council Meeting, Agenda Item 15, August 10, 2004 �� > M Dear Sirs, �' z I have provided the following three cases to answer questions that have arisen from the recent hearings on recovery homes. This data answers the questions of why the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) and FHAA (.Federal Fair Housing Act Amendment) were enacted and what the intentions and purposes are behind these federal laws: L PURPOSE OF ADA - The following excerpts are from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, Bay Area Addiction Research and Treatment Inc v. City of Antioch,CA 1999: • Congress' stated purposes in enacting the ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) also support its application to zoning. Within the text of the ADA, Congress set forth its broad goal of "providing a clear and comprehensive national mandate for the elimination of discrimination against individuals with disabilities" 42 U.S.C. Section 1210(b)(1) (1999) "individuals with disabilities are a discrete and insular minority who have been faced with restrictions and limitations, subjected to a history of purposeful unequal treatment, and relegated to a position of political powerlessness in our society, based on characteristics that are beyond the control of such individuals and resulting from stereotypic assumptions not truly indicative of the individual ability of such individuals to participate in, and contribute to, society." Without speculating on the kind and quality of evidence needed to establish a significant risk, we note that in assessing the evidence, courts must be mindful to the ADA's express goal of eliminating discrimination against people with disabilities. See 42 U.S.C. Section1210(b)(1) As the Arline Court recognized, the Rehabilitation Act was meant to protect disabled individuals "from deprivations based on prejudice, stereotypes, or unfounded fear." 2. INTENTION OF FHAA - The following excerpts are from The Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District, Jeffery Hall v. Butte Home Health, 1997: In amending the Fair Employment and Housing Act, the Legislature declared: "It is the Legislature's intent to make the following findings and declarations regarding unlawful housing practices prohibited by this act: [P] (a) That public and private land use practices, decisions, and authorizations have restricted, in residentially zoned areas, the establishment and operation of • 1810 W. Ocean Front, Newport Beach, CA Phone. (800) 876 -6378 Fax (949) 675-0379 www.usnodrucs.com • NARCJr NOW Southern California group housing... [P] (b) That persons with disabilities... are significantly more likely than other persons to live with unrelated persons in group housing. [P] (c) That this act covers unlawful discriminatory restrictions against group housing for these persons." ( Stats. 1993, ch. 1277, §18.) "The Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 articulates the public policy of the United States as being to encourage and support handicapped persons' right to live in a group home in the community of their choice. [Citation] `[Section 3604(f)(2)] is intended to prohibit special restrictive covenants... which have the effect of excluding... congregate living arrangements for persons with handicaps."' (Rhodes v. Palmetto Pathway Homes, Inc. (1991). 3. INTENTION OF FHAA - The following are from the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit, City of Edmonds v. Washington State Building Code Council and Oxford House Inc.: [ *806] The FHAA imposes an affirmative duty to reasonably accommodate handicapped persons. 42 U.S.C. Section 3604(f)(3)(B). [ * *13] Reasonable accommodation is borrowed from case law interpreting the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. 1988 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 2186 (citing Southeastern Community College v. Davis, (1979)). . Congress intended the FHAA to protect the right of handicapped persons to live in the residence of their choice in the community. 1988 U.S.C.C.A.N. at 2185. The FHAA was to "end the unnecessary exclusion of persons with handicaps from the American mainstream." See United States v. Badgett, 976 (8a' Cir. 1992) (question not whether any housing made available, but whether housing individual desired was denied on impermissible grounds) i hope this has been helpful in clarifying the intent and purposes of the ADA and FHAA. Respectfully, Ge s�0 66814617 ny ( ) President, Narconon So. Cal. CC: Robert Burnham, City Attorney Homer Bludau, City Manager Jon Stearman, Director of Legal Affairs, Narconon So. Cal. • 1810 W. Ocean Front, Newport Beach, CA Phone: (800) 876 -6378 Fax (949) www.usnodrucs.com • "RECE dED „FfER AGENDA PRil`;TEC "115 6-10'0 August 6, 2004 FAX AND HAND DELIVERED To: Newport Beach City Council Attn: Mayor Todd Ridgeway and Council Members: Steve Rosansky, Don Webb, Gary Adams, Steven Bromberg, Richard Nichols and John Heffernan, RE: PROPOSED ORDINANCE - AGENDA ITEM NO. 15, AUGUST 10, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING Gentlemen, You will find on the following pages a summary report on statutory legislation as it applies to the proposed ZONING AMENDN ENTlRECOVERY FACILITIES. We are submitting this information and research because approving an ordinance of this type, the City Council is creating a creating a financial risk for the City of Newport Beach and its residents. This is based on recent cases and the thousands of dollars that cities paid -out as part of legal settlements for failing to comply with applicable Federal and State laws. In fact, over $250.000.00 is the average case settlement against a city for non - compliance with the laws and found to be discriminating against disabled people. And, this does not include the legal, administrative, public relations and good -will costs incurred by a city. The City and its residents are the ones that suffer, if monetary losses are incurred. •Further, from a moral and ethical standpoint it is evident that the proposed ordinance is discriminatory. We urge you to not take such a financial risk that can have a negative impact on the great City of Newport Beach. Sincerely, Christopher Bauge it rierly Orange County Sober Living Coalition ` _? �n cc: Robert Burnham — City Attorney, Newport Beach Homer Bludau — City Manager, Newport Beach • LaVOnne Hark-less — City Clerk, Newport Beach SUMMARY REPORT ON STATUTORY LEGISLATION & CASE LAW AS IT APPLIES TO THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE - AGENDA ITEM NO. 15, AUGUST 10, 2004 CITY COUNCIL MEETING The following Federal Acts, recent legislation, as well as case law history will support that the proposed ordinance is not only facially invalid because it does not substantially further any legitimate government interest, but also is invalid and unenforceable because it deprives disabled persons equal protection of the law, by requiring a now invented "Federal Exception Permit. This ordinance clearly inconsistent with Federal statutory law. Federal Acts/Recent Legislation Summary The key issue with the proposed ordinance labeled is that the city has not proved, provided viable data, or articulated that the ordinance is necessary to further a legitimate government interest and the ordinance also has no language in it that shows how it will reasonably accommodate handicapped individuals. The ordinance makes a feeble attempt, if any, calling to preserve the unique character of residential neighborhoods. The Fair Housing Act Amendment of 1988 prevents city's from adopting or enforcing zoning • ordinances that impact recovery facilities for handicapped individuals differently than non - handicapped residential uses in the same zone unless the City can prove the ordinance is necessary to further a legitimate government interest; and reasonably accommodate handicapped individuals. The FHAA (Federal Fair Housing Act) makes it unlawful to refuse to make reasonable accommodations to rules, policies, practices, or services when such accommodations may be necessary to afford persons with disabilities an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. What is "reasonable accommodation' for purposes of the act? Well according to the Joint statement of the Department of Housing and Urban Development and the Department of Justice in their statement release May 17, 2004 "A reasonable accommodation is a change, exception, or adjustment to a rule, policy, practice, or service that may be necessary for a person with a disability to have an equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling, including public and common use spaces." CASE LAWISTATUTORY LYTERPRETATION CITY OF CLEBURNE, TEXAS, ET AL. v CLEBURNE LIVING CENTER, INC., SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES • July 1, 1985 Decided Pape I of 5 • Summary: The following case will demonstrate what happens when, a local city government, passes an ordinance that is similar to the proposed ordinance, without providing for a legitimate government interest and providing reasonable accommodation. This case proves that the ordinance is facially invalid and unenforceable. The CLC (Cleburne Living Center) filed suit in Federal District court against the city and a number of its officials, alleging, inter alias, that the zoning ordinance was invalid on its face and as applied because it discriminated against the mentally retarded in violation of the equal protection rights of the CLC and its potential residents. The district court found that if the potential residents of Featherstone Street Home were not mentally disabled, but the home was the some in all other respects, it's use would be permitted under the city ordinance, and that the city council decision "was motivated primarily that the residents of the home would be persons who are mentally retarded" The court considered heightened scrutiny to he particularly appropriate in this case, hecause the city ordinance withheld a henefit which, although not fundamental, was very important to the mentally retarded. Without group homes, the court stated, the retarded could never hope to integrate themselves into the community... the court held that the ordinance was invalid on its face because it did not substantially further any important governmental interest. • BAY AREA ADDICTION RESEARCH AND TREATMENT, INC v. CITY OF ANTIOCH UNITED STATE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT June 3, 1999 • Summary: This case will illustrate how zoning for disabled individuals is regulated by Federal Law, and that is not in the control of local, city, or state governments. On July 6, 1998 Bay Area Addiction Research and Treatment hrought a class action lawsuit against the City of Antioch under the ADA, the Rehahilitation Act, and 42 U.S.C., for violations of Supremacy, Due Process, and Equal protection clauses. Bay Area sought a declaratory judgment that Ordinance 4 941 C -S was unlawful and a permanent injunction enjoining Antioch from enforcing the ordinance or otherwise interfering with Bay Area's use of sunset lane as a Methadone Clinic. The District court found that zoning is an activity covered by the ADA and the Rehabilitation Act and that appellants are qualified individuals with disabilities, entitled to protection under hoth statutes. The Second Circuit in several similar cases (Innovative Health Systems, Inc. v. City of White Plains) held that these statutes (ADA, Rehahilitation Act, 42 U.S.C.) do apply to zoning. Pate 2 of; Based on these findings it is evident that the proposed Ordinance labeled "Exhibit A" is invalid, • and that "Section 5- labeled Land Use Regulation" and the adjoining zoning chart is both discriminatory, and in direct violation of the American Disabilities Act, The Rehabilitation Act and U.S.C. Section 42, because zoning as the Courts found is governed by Federal Law, meaning local governments cannot make zoning determinations in cases involving disabilities. TURNING POINT, INC., v. CITY OF CALDWELL; CALDWELL PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUTr JANUARY 24, 1996 Summary: Lastly we present a case that demonstrates the unenforceability of Occupancy Limitations for the disabled and the rehabilitation agencies that provide those services. Turning Point, Inc., a non -profit Idaho corporation brought suit against the City of Caldwell Idaho, and the Planning and Zoning Department. Turning Point alleged that the zoning ordinance of Caldwell was unconstitutionally vague and that its enforcement against Turing Point was a violation of the Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C. The court found that the occupancy limitation was unreasonable, and that the City of Caldwell • had failed to make reasonable accommodations for the handicapped in violation of 42 U.S.C. The court further enjoined enforcement of the conditions it found not to be reasonable accommodations. It awarded damages to Turning Point of $5,618 representing lost program reimbursement, because of the restriction placed on the number of residents. Here beyond dispute, it was found that housing for the handicapped was affected by the City of Caldwell's failure to reasonably accommodate, and its insistence on an occupancy level was unreasonable. The Fair Housing Act, 42 U.S.C., empowers courts to award appropriate attorney fees, as well as operating losses accrued because of violations of the act. Turning Point also sought reimbursement from the City of Caldwell for its attorney fees. RECENT SETTLEMENTS Summary: Next we look at what happens when cities and local municipalities either pass ordinances that fail to reasonably accommodate the disabled; do not support a legitimate government interest and /or are discriminatory in nature. > City of Taylor, Michigan agrees to pay 5550,000 for refusing to rezone adult residential care center • PaL,e 3 of • In yet another case where a city's government has been accused of denying housing rights to its disabled citizens, a new large settlement has been reached. The city of Taylor Michigan has agreed to pay $550,000 to settle a discrimination lawsuit filed by. the owners of a residential facility for disabled adults. According to the lawsuit Taylor officials had refused to allow the facility to house more than six residents because of zoning laws. The residential facility was in a single family area. Zoning requirements in single family areas limited the number of persons living to six. When the facility asked the City to rezone their property, Taylor Officials said no. In December of 1996, the sixth Circuit court issues a ruling on behalf of the plaintiffs, agreeing that the City of Taylor failed to make reasonable accommodation. Following the Sixth circuit ruling, the City of Taylor agreed to settle. The cash settlement included money for lost profits, damages, attorneys' fees, legal costs, and interest Taylor officials also agreed to an injunction, prohibiting it from interfering with the operations of adult foster care facilities in single family neighborhoods. Summarv: ➢ City of Sedona Settles Housing Discrimination Complaint for $530,334 Recently, the City of Sedona agreed to settle a housing discrimination complaint, brought by • recovery Alternatives, Inc. and Anne Cunningham, its Executive director, both represented by the Arizona Center for Disability Law (the Center). The January 2003 administrative complaint, filed with the Arizona Attorney General's Office, alleged that the city violated the Federal Fair Housing Act when its Land Development code thwarted efforts of a group home for individuals with disabilities from operating in a Sedona residential neighborhood. In May, all parties entered settlement negotiations with the Arizona Civil Right Division of the Attorney General's Office. The parties successfully reached a settlement on June 26, 2003. Sedona agreed to the following: • Permanently post a disclaimer in Sedona City Hall which states that discrimination on the basis of race, color, religion, sex, national origin, familial status, or disability is prohibited • Convene a study session of its Planning Commission in consultation with the Center within 120 days of the agreement to consider the revisions and amendments to the Land Development Code, and other city codes regarding placement of group homes, and the City's obligation and duties under the Federal and State Fair Housing Acts and other laws applicable to people with disabilities. • Offer a Fair Housing training session to City staff working on housing issues • Purchase complainant's property intended for the group home for the sum of $382,000.00 • Pay a settlement amount of $148,334.00, which included attorneys fees cost to the . Center Pate 4 of; Summary: Daytona Beach Group Home continues operation and wins $100,000 settlement after attempted Shutdown The City commission of Daytona Beach gave up a year long fight against a home for recovering drug and alcohol addicts. The city will pay a $100,000 to settle a federal discrimination lawsuit ➢ City of Fresno, California agrees to $535,000 in Justice Department disability discrimination case. Under the settlement agreement the city agreed to the following: • Training for its employees and officials to ensure they will not discriminate against persons with disabilities in the future; • $445,000 in grants to help pay the renovation of the cedar heights apartment building • $85,000 to cover the plaintiffs' legal costs; • $5,000 to cover the housing cost of the man who could not move onto cedar heights while renovation was delayed; • A community outreach program to inform the public about services and available to Fresno residents with disabilities; and • • A review of Fresno's current housing programs to determine if any changes are needed to accommodate persons with disabilities. To conclude, we have shown that the proposed ordinance is facially invalid because it supports no legitimate government interest. We have shown that the proposed ordinance is discriminatory by nature, due to the proposed adoption of a "Federal Exception Permit" for Residential Rehabilitation General. We have demonstrated how the ordinance's provisions for zoning fail to reasonably accommodate the disabled and therefore are a violation of the Fair Housing Act. We have given several pertinent cases where the courts have found that zoning for the disabled is not a local government function but is over - ridden by Federal Law. We specifically cited cases where the American Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act were ignored by local city governments and zoning commissions and the significant monetary repercussions that took place as a result. We have shown that occupancy limitations cannot be enforced on Rehabilitation agencies and that the failure of local governments to abide by the ADA and Fair Housing Act, can leave them liable, subject to scrutiny, and attract negative publicity and media. We have shown how the courts found that "mere negative attitudes, or fear, unsubstantiated by factors that are cognizable in a zoning proceeding, are not permissible bases for treating disabled persons differently (e.g. Federal Exception Request) , from apartment houses, multiple dwellings, and the like. In essence the proposed ordinance is in blatant violation of Federal Law. • Palle ? of 5 • From Sent: To: Subject: Gigi Dickson [gig i_dicFaon@ho:rr,aiLcon] Saturday, August 21, 2004 1:09 PM HBludau @ city. newport- beach.ca.us; Ihar kless @city.newport- b=ach.ca.us, garo!d_adams @hotmai!.com', JHFF@ao!.com, ranichols @ranichols.mto, dandee@earthlink.net; Parandigm@aol.com; don2webb @earthlinknet:. tr idoeway @city.newpo,L- beach.ca.us; roiauson @city.newport- beach.ca.us [Ot AP)Ordinances & Zoning Laws Enforcement Urged Lfar _caders Of Our C-ty, This email is to notify the City of violations of the C` -ty Zoaing Code. To date, prior letters of complaint sent by numerous residents have resulted in no action. This letter serves as an official and legal request for immediate enforcement of the Newport Beach City Zoning Code, and declaration of nuisance d abatement. Specific issues and Zoning Code citations follow. In a letter received from Fire Marshall Dennis Lockard dated November 25, 2003 he stated, _a fire clearance has been granted to Narconon Southern California Inc., for the address of 1810 W. Ocean Front with the following conditions: 1. The previous ambulatory capacity of 32 persons shall be amended to a total ambulatory capacity of 27 persons, which includes staff and clients." Narconon, Inc. (1810 W. Oceanrront) is a Drug and Alcohol Rehabilitation .Business operating in a residential property /district. It is defined in city code as a 'Residential Care, General' business. " Twenty -four -hour non- medical care for seven or more persons, including wards of the Juvenile court, in need of personal services, supervision, protection, or assisEarrce essential for sustaining the activities of daily living. This classification includes only those services and facilities licensed by State of California." IN3 Zoning Code 20.05 -0401 'USE PERMIT' REQUIRED FOR 'RESIDEN^t I_AL CAR;, GENERAL'S r3 Zoning :Code 20.10.020 - Requires a 'Use Permit' for 'Residential Ca General' facilities. Narconon has never been issued a Use Permit. Cow 20.10.010 details the specific purposes of a Use Permit including, '._ 1_< protect residents from harmful effects of excessive noise, population y density, traffic congestion, and other adverse environmental effects. -the City Zoning Code requires that the city conduct a through environmenta7-�nd residential impact review, public hearing, and secure approval by the City Planning Commission for these facilities. This has not been done. 'FIR£ CLE_4P_ANCE' APPROVED WITHOUT `USE PERMIT' Narconon does not have the required city Use Permit for operation. Why did the Fire Dept.. issue a fire clearance last month for this facility to operate without the required city Use Permit? VIOLATION OF `OFF- STREET PARKING' NB Zoning Code 20.66.030 - Allows only three beds per one off - street parking space for 'Residential Care, General' facilities. The Narconon facility at 1810 W. Ocean Front only contains .3 c -f- street parking spaces. The maximum bed canac_cy of this facility is 9 beds, NOT the 27 beds - permitted by Fire Marshall's amended total on November 25, 2003, Why did the City Fire apartment issue a Fire Clearance and amended capacity for 27? Rnd why has .he city allowed Narconon to operate with 27 -45 beds for years, when the ,taxi mnm should be 9? CERTIr ICPTE Or OCCL -FANCY f CAr- kCITY' WS t:iO4T `USE PERNIT' NB Zoning Code 20.91.015 - No Certificate of Occupancy may be issued without a Use Permit. Again, Narconon holds no city Use Permit, but does 1 0 a a h7 ' E,f MI is t __Ms .•___s -coa—_ a -i_cS ----a '-Y,, T: i 3'_�_ °i L32 Dc =-Ili i`_= • a__c_ __aS been g -anted by the P7a_n ng Director or -_� Pla___ing Commission or by the affi_-a:ative vote L7 he City Council on appeal or _review and then only in accordance with the terms and conditions of the as e_ permit or variance gra- tea., `C_TFY BCS7KBSS LICENS7'' -_SSU_D W1 {'30L'i `JESE PERMIT' The c-ty of Ne_wpc -t Beach has annually '_slued _ City Business :_tens_ Darcor_on for op_ -at ion as _ialty osaital' at 1810 14_ Without a regll. -ed T'_' _-rm+. G'1?i_ Ji0_3teo Code 2J.1C .._ -. 7 S °C___ ]> =tal in a _nti -i p_ -o_ arty with O"::.t 3 JS_ ,.esid 2c rii:i �. r ARCONON LEASES REBID_NZ'?AL PROPERTY WITHOUT OSE PERY1"_', SUSTI'IESS LICENSE CERTIFICATE Or OCCUPANCY, FIRE CLEAlLkNCE NOR STATE LICENSE Narconon has extended their business into an additional residential property at 1811 W. Balboa Blvd. - across the alley from their original location of 1910 W. Ocean Front. Prior letters of complaint regarding this illey^al expansion were forwarded to the Fire Marshall on October 27, 2003, and to the City Assistant Manager and Planning Department Director on October 23, 2003 Significant evidence is available upon request, including a letter from the owner of this additional residential property verifying his rental leasing to Narconon. jattached) * There is NO City Use Permit on file for this additional address. (Code 20.91.015; * There is NO City Business License on file for this additional address- and a use Permit' would be required to issue a Business License. (_Zoning Code 20.91.015) * There is NO Certificate of Occupany on file for this additional address- and a 'Use Permit' would be required to issue such a certificate. (Zoning • Code '20.9 L.015) * There is NO Fire Clearance on Mile for this additional address- and a `Use Permit' would be required to issue_ such a Clearance. (Zoning Code 20.91.015) * There is NO State License on file for this additional property to opera-E=_ as part o'- Narconon. `MIPANSION' TRIGGERS REQUIREMENT FOR IMMEDIATE USE PERMtIT APPLICATION BY ?�TARCONON The `expansion' by Narconon into an additional residential property at 1811 W_ Balboa Blvd_ is in violation of Zoning Code 20.91.055. This city zoning code requires Narconon to now secure a Use Permit since they have expanded services that would require an original use permit. "A _ change to plans that would affect a condition of approval, shall be treated as a new application." In addition, "A use normally permitted by right or by the approval of a use permit, but which is nonconforming by virtue of the required conditions of the district in which it is located, may be expanded, increased or intensified by way of a change in operational characteristics upon the approval of a use permit." This Zoning Code requires an application for a Use Permit be required of Narconon immediately. STATE LICENSING FROM ADP For Narconon to deliver services as a drug /alcohol treatment center they were state- licensed from the California Department of Alcohol and Drug Prograrns (Z1DP). This state license DOES NOT eliminate nor supercede local city zoning code_ The state licensing agency, ADP, is recuired to honor local city zoning codes, business license requirements, and fire departmer-t clearances a occupancy requirements. Quote from ADP document: "Local officials are involved in zoning of property for commercial and resident`` -al • use and issuance of use permits and business licenses." The city of Irvine is an excellent example of enforcement of identical City Zoning Codes, resulting in NO residentially -based Drug /alcohol Treatment C=_-.ters in I ine. FORYULL R,Q=ST - TM1r=D_F_TE ENFORCEMENT OF CITY ZONING CODE 2 _- _v c° . NewDcrt Seac -, ves_ed 4fiLh -=tie dL'�l' or all7h or ity t0 'GS­ perm -� 3 .r -eases cc--. form to • e provisions or this node and shall ssae no permit cr- '�ieer_se for uses, R buildings or ouzdoses in OOni!2ct the prov_Slons _- this code; and any such p= -rust or license issued in conflict w'th the provisioas of this code shall be nnuil and void." [20.55.05.01 ?ORXA REQUEST - DECLAP- ZLTTON OF NUISANCE & FBF'.T3NEN 7- rinally, the City Coning Code rrovi5es for a 1,U15ance; Ahatem8nt' . "An }' bui -,ding cr str�,=.:re set up, = _ectad, ccnscracted, a'_tered, enlarged, Converted, moved or maintained contrary 'cc the provisions of this Code, and anv use of any land, building or Lremises established, conducted, operated or maintained contrary to the OrOVISion of this code, shall be and, the same is hereby declared to be unlawful and a public nuisance; and the City Attorney shall, upon order Of the Citv Council, immediately commence action or proceedings for the abatement and removal -.11 [City Zoning Code 20.96.0303 This email notifies the City cf violations of the City Zoning Code. To date, prior letters of complaint serif by numerous residents ha -,re resulted in no action. This letters serves as an official regsest for immediate enforcement of the Ne-wpors Beach City Zoning Code, and declar=ation of nuisance L abatement. Sincerelv, - Georgianna Dickson 1226 Rutland Road ;1 Newport Beach, CA 925660 •cc- Property owners, neighbors, related agencies & organizations, a press Citv Council members city Police Chief City Planning Commission members Check out Election 2004 for up -to -date election news, plus voter tools and more! http :// special .msn.com /msn /electic)n2004. armx •