Laserfiche WebLink
M M <br />Indian River County's "old" definition of family limited the <br />number of unrelated individuals living together as a family to <br />four (4) . <br />In addition, if the definition of family is amended to limit the <br />number of unrelated persons living together as a family, the <br />County's definition for group homes also needs to be amended to <br />provide for groups of unrelated people (such as the priests) <br />which number greater than four (4) and for those groups. which <br />do not necessarily need to be licensed by the State. <br />RECOMMENDATION <br />Based on the above analysis, including the Planning and Zoning <br />Commission's recommendation, staff recommends that the attached <br />ordinance amending the definitions of family and group home be <br />approved by the Board of County Commissioners. <br />A.M. <br />Commissioner Wodtke reentered the meeting at 10;57 o'clock <br />Chairman Scurlock felt this issue is not the number of <br />people, it is the use of the property adjacent to single-family <br />and multiple -family property. He stressed that social service <br />organizations are pushing to get the disabled back into the <br />community via group homes. <br />Assistant County Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that there <br />are two issues before the Commission today and they are only <br />related because of the way the ordinance is written. The first <br />issue is whether or not to limit the number of unrelated persons <br />living together in an organized or structured fashion -- that is <br />the definition of family. He felt the Commission should treat <br />that separately from how they treat group homes, or the use that <br />the home is put to. Attorney Barkett advised that the U.S. <br />Supreme Court has spoken to both these issues. In a 1974 case <br />they upheld a city ordinance which limited the number of <br />unrelated persons living together to two (2), saying that the <br />local governing authority has a right to do that based upon the <br />desire to create an appropriate atmosphere for family conditions. <br />This year the U.S. Supreme Court has:spoken to put the cities on <br />notice that cities need a clear, rational reason if they want to <br />treat group homes for the developmentally disabled differently <br />than any other residential use. The court is saying that if you <br />intend to discriminate against persons or organizations desiring <br />48 y 1 <br />goOK 63 3 d <br />JAN 2 2 1986 <br />