Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use And Housing topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Neighbors tell Lewiston council an unsupervised group home on Grama Drive raises safety, occupancy and notification concerns
Summary
Multiple residents urged the council to investigate an alcohol and drug rehabilitation house on Grama/Grill Drive, saying occupants appear unsupervised overnight, the community was not notified, and the home may exceed allowable occupancy under the city’s reasonable-accommodation rules.
Several Lewiston residents used the city’s public-comment period to raise safety, occupancy and notice concerns about a residence on Grama (referred to in comments variously as Grama/Grail/Grill/Girl Drive) that residents say is operating as a drug- and alcohol-rehabilitation group home.
Everdell Everett told the council the property at 902 Grey 0 Drive (spelling as stated in comment) appears to be a single-family, owner-occupied dwelling that is being used as a rehab center with as many as 16 people, and that the residents are unsupervised overnight. Everett asked whether occupants were court-mandated, vetted, counseled or being transported safely and raised concerns about parking and supervision.
Becky Cawley, a Realtor and neighbor, said she researched reasonable-accommodation rules and the city ordinance and understood Lewiston’s ordinance allows up to eight residents under the reasonable-accommodation clause; she said neighbors were told by the owner that up to 16 people would be in the house and that there is no night staff. Neighbors said they first learned of the use when a helper was assisting the new owner move in and that they were not given prior notice. Concerns raised included potential fire risk on nearby bare land, night-time smoking on porches, traffic, parking and the lack of an announced public notice to neighbors.
One speaker said the fire marshal had attempted to visit the property and was denied entry; at least one resident said they had discussed the matter with Mayor Johnson and requested additional follow-up. The mayor and council acknowledged the comments and asked the residents to provide documentation and indicated staff would review the matter; the council did not take formal action during the meeting.
The residents repeatedly framed their comments as safety and neighborhood-impact concerns and said they are not opposing rehabilitation services but want clarification about supervision, occupancy and applicable legal protections for neighbors and persons living at the facility.
No formal council action or vote was taken at the meeting on the matter; staff requested that neighbors provide documents to the city clerk for follow-up and investigation.
