Laserfiche WebLink
recommend increasing that number of unrelated individuals to six but noted that this suggestion <br />of four was taken from discussions with the Commission and Council. <br />Ms. Johnson commented that limiting the number of individuals in a recovery home to four would <br />no longer be purposeful as it does not provide that sense of community and support. She also did <br />not believe that should be limited to six and noted that if she is forced to reduce the number of <br />people, she will come forward with an ADA reasonable accommodation request and will go <br />through a whole battle until they come to an agreement. She stated that to put every homeowner <br />into the four unrelated person category when the City cannot regulate that does not seem fair, as it <br />would then only apply to those that are targeted. <br />Acting Chairperson Bauer commented that it would seem inconsistent in how the lawful <br />nonconformity would be addressed comparing the previously discussed license for auto sales and <br />this situation. <br />City Attorney Knaak commented that the currently constitutional direction even allows up to six <br />and has been the standard for a long time. He acknowledged that the City is attempting to define <br />what a family is, as the term single-family home is used throughout the Code. He stated that it is <br />indicated that there may be some social changes going on, but the City could choose to define that <br />term. He stated that if the limit were set at four unrelated individuals and six currently occupy the <br />home, if one were to leave, then they could not be replaced as the goal would be to reach <br />conformity. He stated that he provided the same response for car dealers, that if one of six were <br />to leave, they could not be replaced. He recognized the effort to define a family for the purpose <br />of single-family home but noted that the City does not have to do that. <br />Ms. Johnson asked if the City should be able to define who can live in a home you purchase. <br />City Attorney Knaak replied that the answer is right as this has been done for decades. <br />Ms. Johnson commented that there are many homes that would be out of compliance that would <br />not be targeted, while others would be immediately targeted. She asked why this change would <br />be needed. She commented that there is a hobby farm where four or five seniors live at the hobby <br />farm with two unrelated individuals that run the farm. She stated that is just another example of a <br />situation that would be out of compliance. She asked who would regulate the number of people <br />living in the home. <br />Commissioner Heineman asked how this would be enforced. <br />City Attorney Knaak replied that if the City imposes the restriction that people are unaware of, <br />that could create a problem that is not anticipated. She commented that there are things that were <br />described by the resident that are illegal, but those situations are things that have not been <br />considered. <br />Commissioner Heineman used the example of the elderly people living on the property and a <br />complaint were registered. He asked if a call were made and someone said they were related, <br />Planning Commission/ July 27, 2023 <br />Page 12 of 18 <br />