Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Community Residential Home topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Two owners requested reduced 1,000‑ft separation for small group homes; neighbors raised traffic and neighborhood integrity concerns
Summary
Two separate applicants requested variances to the 1,000‑foot separation requirement for community residential homes: one sought a reduction to ~560 ft citing different licensing and practical distance; the other sought a small 36‑ft reduction (to 964 ft) to relocate an existing group home. Neighbors expressed concerns about parking, traffic and commercializing residential streets.
Chris Grandlinard and Sierra James presented staff findings on two distance‑separation requests for community residential homes. Grandlinard said the county’s land development code requires 1,000 feet between community residential homes (6 or fewer residents), measured property‑line to property‑line. Alvin Baldwin asked for a reduction to approximately 560 feet, saying the existing nearby home is licensed by a different agency and that driving distance is greater than straight‑line distance. Michelle Tallini requested a 36‑foot variance (resulting in a 964‑ft separation) to move a group home she operates to a nicer house; she said the move would not increase staff travel and that state licensing provides oversight.
Supporters for Tallini described her experience with persons with developmental disabilities and urged approval. Neighbors adjacent to Tallini’s proposed site and Baldwin’s request described worries about increased staff vehicles, ambulance activity and curbside parking and said multiple group homes in a small area had changed neighborhood character. Tallini and her supporters emphasized monthly state monitoring, awake supervision and a long record of residential operations.
The hearing officer closed public testimony on both items; no final decisions were announced at the hearing.
