Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Residential Care Home topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Cambridge planning commission denies special exception for residential care home at 506 S. Regulator Drive
Summary
The Planning Commission voted 4–3 to deny a special exception that would have allowed a small residential care home for 3–6 residents at 506 S. Regulator Drive after neighbors raised operational and parking concerns and commissioners split over conditions.
The Cambridge Planning Commission voted 4–3 on March 3 to deny a special exception request from Dimple Manor to operate a residential care home at 506 S. Regulator Drive.
The applicants, identified in the record as Noel Duhaney and Damion Ffolkes, told the commission the proposed home would house between three and six residents and would be staffed around the clock. "There will be 24/7 supervision," Ffolkes said, and he said caregiving staff would be primarily certified nursing assistants with a delegated registered nurse overseeing operations. Commissioners and staff pressed the applicant on licensing for meal provision, accessibility features and adherence to homeowners association covenants.
Several nearby residents spoke at the public hearing, including Janette Ventura, Mark Elliot and Carrie Asvel, expressing concerns about on‑street parking, the home’s operations and whether private covenants allow a business use on the lot. Director Brian D. Herrmann responded to those concerns by noting that the city does not enforce private covenants, codes and restrictions (CC&Rs) for homeowners associations.
Commissioner Eugene Lauer moved to recommend approval of the application as conditioned in the staff report and to prohibit street parking associated with the facility; that motion failed on a 3–4 vote. Commissioner Mary Losty then moved to deny the staff recommendation; that motion passed 4–3, constituting a denial of the special exception.
The denial leaves the applicants without the zoning clearance needed to operate the residential care home at the proposed address. The record shows the commission’s decision turned on a mix of neighborhood objections and split views among commissioners about whether conditions in the staff report would sufficiently mitigate impacts. The minutes do not record any appeal or next steps; applicants may seek further administrative remedies or resubmit with revised materials.
