## Facts

- A nonprofit corporation formed to provide housing for mentally retarded citizens agreed to purchase a house in a Brewer zoning district limited to low-density “single family” residential use.
- The corporation applied for an occupancy certificate to operate a state-licensed boarding home: a supervised group home for six adults or older minors with mental retardation, staffed by about two full-time employees.
- Brewer’s ordinance defined “family” as persons living as a single housekeeping unit in a domestic relationship based on a domestic bond, and excluded arrangements similar to boarding houses.
- The code enforcement officer denied the certificate, concluding the proposed use was not “single family,” and suggested pursuing approval under a different use category (such as a nursing home); the corporation declined.
- The corporation appealed to the City’s Board of Appeals, which affirmed, relying in part on findings that resident stays averaged about one to one and one-half years and the arrangement lacked the stability associated with the ordinance’s “domestic bond” concept.
- The corporation, joined by state entities involved in the mental-retardation program, sought judicial review; the Superior Court affirmed, and the plaintiffs appealed. The City cross-appealed on venue.

## Issues

1. Whether state involvement in the group home rendered the project exempt from, or not subject to, municipal zoning regulation.
2. Whether a supervised group home for six unrelated residents with rotating staff qualified as a permitted “single family” use under the ordinance’s “family” definition.
3. Whether excluding the group home from the single-family district violated due process or equal protection.
4. Whether venue in Kennebec County was improper.

## Decision

- The court affirmed the judgment upholding the permit denial.
- The project was not exempt from local zoning based on state licensing or program affiliation.
- The proposed use did not fall within the ordinance’s definition of “family” and therefore was not a permitted single-family use in the district.
- The ordinance, as applied, did not violate due process or equal protection.
- Venue was proper; the City’s cross-appeal was denied.

## Legal Principles

- A private entity operating a state-related program is subject to municipal zoning absent clear legislative preemption or a demonstrated basis requiring displacement of local land-use authority.
- A zoning definition of “family” centered on a domestic bond and single housekeeping unit may exclude group living arrangements that function primarily as boarding or institutional residences rather than a domestic household.
- Substantive due process is satisfied where land-use classifications rationally relate to legitimate governmental objectives such as preserving residential character and neighborhood stability.
- Equal protection is not violated when an ordinance is facially neutral, applies uniformly to unrelated groups, and is justified by land-use characteristics rather than disability status.
- Venue challenges fail where applicable statutes and party alignment support the chosen forum.

## Conclusion

The court sustained Brewer’s refusal to treat a supervised group home as a single-family use under a domestic-bond definition of “family,” rejected claims of state zoning immunity and constitutional violations, and upheld venue in Kennebec County.


Penobscot Area Hous. Dev. Corp. v. City of Brewer, 434 A.2d 14 (Me. 1981)