Land Use—Alcoholism and Substance Abuse Rehabilitation Home—Discrimination Suit Against a Town—Defendants Moved to Dismiss—Complaint Sufficiently Alleged That Zoning Code Was Discriminatory on Its Face—’Younger’ and ‘Colorado River’ Abstention Doctrines Inapplicable—Building Inspector Seemed to Change His Mind Solely Because of Community Opposition—Objections Based on Speculative, Conclusory and Prejudicial View of Proposed Residents’ Disabilities—Claim Based on Classification Determination, Not Ripe—Failure to Seek Use Variance or Other Form of Relief—Futility Exception Not Established—Facial Discrimination Claim Sufficiently Alleged—Applying for Use Variance More Burdensome Than Applying for Special Use Permit
The plaintiff, “a not-for-profit mental health and rehabilitation agency,” sought “to establish a sober living residence for women recovering from alcoholism and/or substance abuse [residence] at a two-acre property [site].” The two-story residence will house 16 women (residents). “The residence is not a detox facility, and no nursing or medical services will be provided there.” “Residents will have … completed a … treatment program and will be transitioning to a sober living environment before … integrating back into society.” The “residents will live together as a family … and assist each other in their recovery from alcoholism and/or substance abuse.” Their residents’ disabilities “make it difficult for them to socialize, hold employment and live with their families independently.”
