Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Caregiver topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission recommends rezoning to allow a manufactured home for family caregiving on Ben Hill Road
Summary
A rezoning request for 4.62 acres at 1008 Ben Hill Road to permit a 14x40 manufactured home for the petitioner’s mother‑in‑law was presented as a family caregiving accommodation; staff noted differences between R2 and R5 and options involving deed arrangements were discussed.
The planning commission considered a request to rezone 4.62 acres at 1008 Ben Hill Road from Low‑Density Single‑Family Residential (R2) to Rural Residential (R5) to allow placement of a single manufactured home for in‑family caregiving purposes.
Petitioner Alice Harden and a family representative described the request as an urgent family need: the petitioners said the mother‑in‑law is in ailing health and the manufactured home would provide on‑site caregiving, medication management and easier access for family members. The requested manufactured home was described as a 14‑by‑40 unit.
Staff explained that the R5 district permits manufactured homes while the R2 district does not, and that the parcel sits at the convergence of R2 and R5 districts. Staff recommended denial on the grounds that R5 could introduce a dissimilar dwelling type into an area characterized by site‑built, single‑family homes; staff noted there is an adjacent R5 district across Airport Road. Petitioners pointed to existing manufactured homes nearby, the narrow size of the requested unit, and their intention to deed a small parcel to meet septic and setback requirements; a family member said they would deed 0.6 acres so the home could be placed with required septic and field lines.
Commission discussion covered alternatives, including creating a life‑estate deed or reconfiguring parcels under General Agriculture (GA) rules that allow a secondary dwelling in some circumstances. The petitioner said the manufactured home would be temporary and removed after the mother‑in‑law’s passing; the family discussed a life‑trust arrangement that would return the parcel to the family estate later.
The commission voted to recommend approval (record shows an affirmative commission vote); the matter will be forwarded to the Board of Commissioners for final action. The petitioner was advised about septic, setback and septic‑field requirements and the need to meet UZO standards even if rezoned.
