Browse
Search
Agenda - 05-16-2006-5j
OrangeCountyNC
>
Board of County Commissioners
>
BOCC Agendas
>
2000's
>
2006
>
Agenda - 05-16-2006
>
Agenda - 05-16-2006-5j
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/23/2013 8:54:55 AM
Creation date
8/29/2008 9:27:42 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
BOCC
Date
5/16/2006
Document Type
Agenda
Agenda Item
5j
Document Relationships
Minutes - 20060516
(Linked To)
Path:
\Board of County Commissioners\Minutes - Approved\2000's\2006
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
71
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
51 <br />City of Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio 30 <br />BB o AA Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice <br />assume a leadership role in advancing and encouraging thoughtful modification of land use <br />and development regulation. "55 While this lays the burden on the State, the City and <br />County should consider their role in assuring that they are not involved in promoting <br />barriers to equal housing, The Guide includes the following recommendations for <br />evaluating how regulatory barriers may be impediments and how they may be modified: <br />States should require that all communities have comprehensive plans which <br />include a housing element <br />States should establish mandatory, preemptive stateside building codes <br />3, Infrastructure needs should be tied to the capital improvement and housing <br />elements approved in the comprehensive plan <br />4. States should enact legislation mandating the circumstances and conditions <br />upon which local governments may impose impact fees. Such legislation <br />should allow exemptions or reduced fee schedules for lower income housing <br />5. States should take a leadership role in providing education and technical <br />assistance for local officials, developers, residents and other interested <br />parties in planning and regulatory issues <br />Four key areas were reviewed as part of the analysis. They were selected because of the <br />possible adverse effects they could have on families and persons with disabilities. <br />A. Definitions used for "families ", "group homes ", "dwelling unit' <br />B. Regulations (if any) regarding "group homes" <br />C. Ability for "group homes" or other similar type housing to be developed, <br />D. Unreasonable restrictions, costs on developing multi- family housing units, <br />such as lot size requirements, impact fees, setbacks. <br />Discriminatory zoning regarding group homes is probably one of the most litigated areas <br />of fair housing regulations. Across the country advocacy groups for the disabled are filing <br />complaints over restrictive zoning codes and in most cases these groups are prevailing. <br />Perhaps one of the most influential court rulings regarding zoning and group homes was <br />The City of Edmonds vs. Oxford House, Inc. This case also addresses the issue of the <br />definition of family contained in zoning regulations, The fundamental part of this case was <br />whether a definition of family that allowed for unlimited related individuals in a unit but <br />limited unrelated individuals to five or fewer was discriminatory .56 <br />" Making Housing Affordable: Breaking Down Regulatory Barriers - A Self- Assessment Guide <br />for States, p 1 <br />SG Court Mandates Redefinition of Family, Robert F. Manely, O.RC. Newsletter, December 10, <br />1995, p. 10 and 11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.