Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout01.28.88-Residential Care Facilities Ordinance WorkshopM I N U T E S RESIDENI'IAL CARE FACILITIES ORDINANCE WORKSHOP City Manager's Conference Roan January 28, 1988 7:00 P.M. Planning and Zoning Commission: John Morris Eddie Keith Joe Dennison Jay Malone Gary Davidson Tom Speer Others In Attendance: Bill Colbert, City Attorney Harry Ellis, Author of Minority Report Art Harris, Chairman of Advisory Committee Joyce Malone Nancy Simmons, Sanford Herald City of Sanford Staff: Jay Marder, City Planner Bettie Sonnenberg, Zoning and Arbor Inspector Bill Simmons, Director of Engineering and Planning The meeting was called to order by the Chairman of Planning and Zoning Camission, John Morris. Chairman Morris stated that the City Commission has referred the Residential Care Facility Ordinance back to Planning and Zoning Commission to more strictly delineate requirements that the City should make with regard to congregate care and foster home facilities. Mr. Malone asked what is the procedure; if the reccmrnendation tonight would go back to the City Commission? Mr. Norris stated that the recommendation will go back to the City Commission and the City Commission then has the ability to hold public hearings on the new ordinance or the ordinance as it first came out. The City Commission has problems with certain definitions and requirements within the ordinance so they referred it back to Planning and Zoning to refine and, hopefully, to solve some of the problems between the ordinance and the report of the Advisory Cammittee. Mr. Colbert stated that in the letter he sent to the City Cammission after they had reviewed the report and after they had scene comments, he was transmitting back to the City Commission the revised ordinance. Due to some of the ccmm ants the Ccmmissioners made in the worksession, Mr. Colbert stated he highlighted in that letter five areas where changes had been made: Residential Care Facilities Ordinance Workshop January 28, 1988 Page 2 ° Standards section was changed to require a responsible person to be on duty as well as on -site while the residents were in the facility. ° To provide that any residential care facility not regularly inspected by another governmental entity, such as the State of Florida, be inspected by the City. ° To treat SR--1 zone property the same as SR -lAA and SR -lA. ° To eliminate in the PUD zone a maximum of 8 residents. ° Licensing section was changed to require all residential care facilities to obtain a City occupational license as opposed to having just those licensed by the State. Chairman Morris asked Mr. Harris if the State requires any congregate care facility or any ACLF that has an occupational license to be considered as a congregate care faci- lity and thereby they would fall under that requirement to meet all State requirements. Mr. Harris stated that he had a meeting with the Deputy Assistant Secretary of HRS and he had asked the same question and the answer to that is "yes ". Mr. Speer asked that if we could, in the Ordinance, territorial wise, exclude residen- tial care facilities from single family residential and strictly go with the RMOI, multiple family district or commercial. Mr. Harris stated that he didn't see why we couldn't, but wouldn't include in RMOI. Mr. Colbert stated that there is a Texas case, the Clebourne case, and this past year there has been a Miami case that has been decided in Federal Court. what those cases seem to be saying is that you can't restrict these uses to simply a commercial area of the City without violating the person's rights to equal protection under the Federal Constitution. That is, is that you cannot exclude them from all residential areas and put them just in a commercial area. In addition, the Comprehensive Planning Act requires local governments, the City and the County, to provide within their Comprehensive Plans areas for this type of facility. Mr. Malone asked Mr. Colbert if we could exclude the residential care facilities from commercial areas and put them in residential areas. Mr. Colbert stated that there has been no case decided specifically this way. The trends, both in Federal Courts and through the Planning Acts of the State of Florida, probably would decide against a City like Sanford. They would allow to regulate but not to exclude. He felt exclusion is highly doubtful. Mr. Speer stated that he felt we ought to respect single family and uphold single family. Residential Care Facilities Ordinance Workshop January 28, 1988 Page 3 Mr. Malone asked that if we determined that congregate living facilities are commercial ventures by licensing, would the courts say that we cannot keep commercial ventures out of single family residential areas? Cannot we have a zone that excludes commercial ventures? Mr. Colbert stated that the courts will not look at the title; they will look at the activity. If they see that the activity is an activity that takes care of the elderly or foster children in an area that is predominantly single family, the dwelling that they are in is adequate, the floor space, bedrooms and bathrooms, and that it does not exceed some acceptable number, the courts will rule as they did in the Texas and Miami cases. It is permitted in a residential neighborhoods. Mr. Speer asked Mr. Colbert if we could adopt the ordinance with the understanding that in single family residential areas they are special exceptions with public hearings by way of conditional uses. This gives an avenue for the neighborhood to address the problem and the court can't come down on us by not having given them half the pie. Chairman Morris stated that the City Attorney has advised that we have to address all the zoning classifications with regard to this problem and we cannot exclude anything because by doing so we would be in violation of the Constitution. Chairman Morris stated that we have the Ordinance that the City has proposed and the City has submitted it to us for our additions, deletions or reccamendations. Mr. Malone stated that there is another recommendation available to us and that is to do nothing to go back and say we think we're covered already. Chairman Morris stated that the Planning and Zoning Commission has not changed its mind. The City Commission felt obligated to establish an advisory committee to go beyond the Planning and Zoning Commission's recommendation. That Advisory Committee returned to the City its recommendations which is in the proposed ordinance that is before us. The City has come back to us and is asking us to respond to the proposed ordinance. Chairman Morris asked Mr. Marder that if we recommended the single family areas of the City be conditional use areas would this handle the planning aspect as far as the State's requirements are concerned. Mr. Marder stated that he wasn't sure if it handled the intent and purpose. The whole intent and purpose is to provide a normal setting in a normal typical neighborhood for persons with some sort of special needs. The conditional use tends to restrict rather than permit certain activities by right. Mr. Colbert stated that if there is going to be a conditional use there would have to be standards and if somebody were denied a conditional use and appealed to the court, the court would look to see what the Planning and Zoning Commission action had con- Residential Care Facilities Ordinance Workshop January 28, 1988 Page 4 sidered. If it considered aesthetics and parking and a number of things that were legitimate considerations there would be a chance that it could stand. If it con- sidered the fact that there were 35 people against it and 2 people for it and that appeared to be the basis for the Planning and Zoning Comtdssion action, there is "nobody across the street" that would uphold that. Chairman Morris stated that as he reads the dicussion, the consensus would be that we would have the single family areas a conditional use, multi- family and the carmercial areas with permitted use subject to the parameters as set forth in the ordinance. Changes suggested to the Residential Care Facility Ordinance were: Underlined Insertions 1. SECTION 3: B. Definitions c. RCF Standards: (3). There shall be a responsible person over the age of eighteen (18) on site and on duty at all times while residents are in the facility. (5) . There shall be sufficient outside recreational area: a minimum of fifty (50) square feet per resident. 2. SECTION 3 : B. Definitions c. RCF Standards (8) Any residential care facility, whether or not it is inspected by any other govern- mental entity, shall be inspected annualy by the City Fire Department for fire safety in accordance with applicable Fire Safety Codes as a_ condition precedent to an occupational license or any renewal thereof. 3. SECTION 3: B. Definitions 2. Resident A resident means a person who is provided with roan, board and personal care in a residential care facility including, but not limited to: elderly persons, physi- cally disabled persons, persons with a developmental disability as defined in 393.001(1), Florida Statutes, non - dangerous persons who are mentally ill as defined in 394.455(3), Florida Statutes, and dependent children as defined in 39.01(9), Florida Statutes. The term "resident" shall not include any person determined to meet the criteria for involuntary placement set forth in 394.467(1), Florida Statutes, or any person who has been convicted of or entered a plea of guilty or polo contendere, or has been found not guilty by reason of insanity of a forcible felony under 776.08, Florida Statutes, without regard to whether adjudi- cation of guilt or imposition of sentence was suspended, deferred or withheld or any 22Eson who has a re-portable catmunicable disease as set forth in Florida Administrative Code - No. 10 D-3. Residential Care Facilities Ordinance Workshop January 28, 1988 Page 5 4. SECTION 3 . C. Permitted Use 1. Residential Care Facilities of Law Intensity DELETE: 1. A maximzn of 4 residents SR -lAA, SR -lA, SR -1, MP-AA, MP -A SECTION 3 . C. Permitted Use 3. Conditional Use a. Residential Care Facilities of Low Intensity ADD: 1. A maximum of 4 residents SR -IAA, SR -lA, SR -1 MP AA, MP -A 5. Correct F. Table of Zoning Districts with Allowable Intensities and Capacities to reflect the conditional use for SR -lAA, SR -1A, SR -1, MP -AA and MP -A. 6. SECTION 4. Article V Use Provisions, Section 1 SR -lAA, Single - Family Residential District DELETE: "A. Uses Permitted 10. Residential care facilities of low intensity with a maxi- mum of four (4) residents." ADD: "B Conditional Uses Permitted, 8. Residential care facilities of low intensity with a maximum of four (4) residents." Meeting adjourned at 10:00 P.M.