Agenda - Planning Commission - 03/07/1995

Home

regulatiofis has been di~cult because of the city's size. As a result, enforcement officials rely on complaints, a system that they find unsatisfactory. The ordinance would impose restrictions to avoid possible adverse effects such as noise, odors, and excessive traffic. Residents would be barred from manufacturing, selling, or servicing products in their homes and from using advertising signs or employing workers who do not live in the residence. Despite these controls, opposition has arisen from residents, particularly in the San Fernando Valley, who fear that the law will not be enforced and that the character o£their single-family neighborhoods and the quality of their lives will be changed irrevocably. Planning commission president Marta Schnabel says, however, that the ordinance will be supportive of families who need to work out of their homes. She notes that 77 other cities in Southern California now allow home businesses with no apparent ill effects. Fay Dolnick Judge Upholds Limits on Group Home A federal judge in Missouri. has upheld a St. Joseph ordinance that limits to five the number of people who may live in a group home in a single-family residential district. U.S. District Court Judge Joseph E. Stevens ruled last montk that the ordinance did not violate the federal Fair Housing Act Amendments in a suit brought in 1991 by Oxford House and its parent company, SAMA, Inc., whose group home serves persons recovering from alcohol and drug dependencies. The plaintiffs argued that the limit on residents was discriminatory because such dependencies qualify as disabilities under the federal law. Oxford House opened in St. Joseph in December 1990 with the intent of housing 11 residents, but after neighbors complained, city officials told the firm it would be limited to five. In his decision, Stevens wrote that the ordinance's only purpose was to limit "only the maximum number of persons in a single residence," adding that the parties had not shown that "its purpose is other than to control population density." SAMA, however, indicated its intent to appeal. In the meantime, however, the U.S. Supreme Court may settle the issue for all group homes nationwide. On November 1, 1994, the Court agreed to hear another case involving an Oxford House in Edmonds, Washington, City of Edmonds v. Washington State Building Code Council, 18 F.3d 802 (9th Cir.), cert. granted, 1994 WL 74041 (No. 94-23). Zoning Newt is a monthly newsletter published by thc American Planning Association. Subscriptions are available for $45 (U.S.) and $54 (foreign). Michael B. Barker, Executive Director~ l~rank S. So, Deputy Executlve Director; William R. Kleln, Director of Research. Zoning Newt is produced at APA. Jim Schwab, Editor; M|chae[ Barrette, Dan Biver, Sarah Bohlen, Fay Dolnick, Michelle Gregory, Sanjay Jeer, Beth MeGulre, Marya Morris, David Smkh, Reporters; Cynthia Cheski, Asfistant Editor; Lisa Barton, Design and Productlon. Copyright ©1995 by Arnerlcan Planning Associatlon, 1313 B. 60th St., Chicago, IL 60637. The American Planning Association has headquarters offices at 1776 Massachusetts Ave., N.W., Washington, DC 20036. All rights reserved. No part ofthls publication may be reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the American Planning Association. Printed on recycled paper, including 50-70% recycled fiber and 10% postconsumer waste. ~ The Edmonds case also involved an ordinance limiting to five the number of unrelated people living in one household in single-family residential districts. In that case, the United States had sued, claiming that city's failure to accommodate Oxford House residents violated the federal act. While the district court in Washington sided with the city of Edmonds, the Ninth Circuit reversed the decision, holding that the act did not exempt the city's zoning from review. Such an exemption, the court said, would remove the act's protection for disabled residents' housing options precisely where it is most needed. Jim Schwab t .,t ports Housing Designed to Build Neighborhoods Dutchess County Department of Planning and Development, 27 High St., Poughkeepsie, NY12601. 1993. 30 pp..$8 plus $1 postage. This heavily illustrated guidebook is Dutchess County's attempt to induce developers to consider local traditional styles of housing with some modern adaptations as a means of meeting the need for affordable housing without compromising the aesthetic charm of the county's residential neighborhoods. Despite its local focus, it should provide some intriguing possibilities for planners and developers in other locales, particularly in the Northeast. Clustering for Resource Protection Maryland Office o/Planning, 301 W. Preston St., Room 1101, Baltimore, MD 21201. 1994. 48pp. $2. These "Models and Guidelines" are part of the "Flexible and Innovative Zoning Series" designed to ameliorate some of the drawbacks of traditional (Euclidean) zoning by discussing alternatives to that method. They are prepared to assist local governments to achieve the goals of Maryland's Economic Growth, Resource Protection, and Planning Act of 1992. This booklet addresses rural resource models, a sensitive areas model, and open space easements. Gateway Zone District Regulations and Guidelines Gateway Zone District Ordinance Denver Planning and Community Development Department, 200 W. 14th Ave., Denver, CO 80204. Guidelines approvedJuly 1.o)4; ordinance approved May 17, 19.93 and amended March 7, 1994. 70pp.; 76pp. $5 each. These two publications contain the legislation and accompanying guidelines for Denver's planned land uses for the gateway linking the new Denver International Airport to the city (see "Planning Basics for Gateway Design," December 1994). This innovative project envisions a mix of uses, including neotraditional elements, designed to produce a positive image of the .city for visitors.