Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Group Home Zoning 1003 High topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council denies PR‑2 overlay petition for a women’s recovery group home at 1003 High Street
Summary
After a public hearing, the council denied a request to apply a PR‑2 planned residential overlay to 1003 High Street to allow a recovery-style group home. Planning staff recommended denial and neighbors raised concerns about capacity, transparency and safety; supporters including a local pastor said the program would help women in recovery.
The City Council denied a petition to add a PR‑2 (planned residential overlay) at 1003 High Street that would have allowed a group‑home program for women to operate with more than the property’s base occupancy.
At a public hearing applicants and neighbors offered competing views. Gabrielle Dowdy, who identified herself as the director of The Upper Room, told the council the program would be a sober living, multi‑phase residence for women and children and that the organization would operate an intake process, background checks and on‑site staff: “We are not a shelter. We are a group home,” she said. Supporters including Pastor Joseph Hall said the program would offer rescue, recovery and rehabilitation for women who had experienced homelessness or other hardships.
Neighbors and surrounding residents testified in opposition. Nearby residents expressed concerns about the suitability of a historic residential neighborhood for a group home, questioned the applicant’s financial transparency and pointed to negative online reviews of the parent organization. Amber Miller, a neighbor, said she worried the organization did not have the professional experience and resources needed for higher‑risk clients and said the group’s nonprofit and financial filings did not provide sufficient transparency.
City planning staff recommended denying the PR‑2 overlay on zoning and capacity grounds. During council discussion, members asked the applicants whether alternative sites in the city had been considered and whether the organization could pursue an R‑3 zoning option; staff noted the city’s zoning and occupancy rules limit long‑term stays in certain types of residences and recommended working with staff to find a more suitable location.
After public comment and staff input the council voted to deny the PR‑2 overlay. Council members who opposed the request said they supported the program goals — including additional housing and services for women — but agreed the proposed location and current zoning were not appropriate. Council members encouraged the applicant to work with staff to find alternate sites and to address capacity, parking and operational questions.
