12.19.2024 Zoning Board of Appeals

good evening I am Joseph Pereira chairman of the zoning board of appeals for the city of Fall River it is 6 pm on Thursday December 19th 2024 we are meeting at one government center in the first floor meeting room person went to Mass General Law chapter 30A section 20 subsection F I hereby notify all persons in attendance that this meeting is being recorded by Fall River government TV Mr

Craig Salvador recording both a video and audio version if anyone desires to make an audio video or combination uh recording of this meeting please notify me now and I shall make a public announcement of your intention our recording secretary this evening is Miss Patty agar sitting to my immediate right present this evening of permanent members John Frank our vice chairman Dan deir and Ricky sahadi as

well as alternate members Mr Eric Kelly and uh Miss Alexis uh an Salmo also with us this evening sitting to my far left is Mr Dan agar director of engineering and planning Patty have all petitions to be considered been properly advertised and all interested parties notified in accordance with the rules and regulations of the zba and Mass General law 40a as amended yes I thereby declare

the December 19th 2024 regularly scheduled meeting of the zoning board of appeals of the city of Fall River open for such business as shall regularly come before it I remind all persons presented before the board including the petitioners abutters anyone in support or anyone opposed to the petition that your presentations should be limited to 3 minutes questions and responses should

be directed actually must be directed through the chair the board's rules and regulations Direct IR the board to specifically look for information which supports the petitioner's claim as such the petitioner should identify and factually support the basis for the petition I hereby advise the petitioner and all interested persons that this is the zoning board of appeals the board's Authority exists personent to Mass

General Law chapter 4A and is limited in scope to uh with the use of land as regulated by chapter 86 of the ordinances of the city of Fall River additional permits licenses reviews Andor approvals may be required for the specific development uh Andor use which is the subject of of the petition before the zoning board this evening the action taken by this board has a real and Lasting effect upon the title to your

real estate I urge all petitioners to seek competent legal counsel before filing your petitions and after a decision has been made by the board a copy of the ordinance is available at the city clerk's office or from the planning department I remind everyone that the building inspector is the zoning enforcement Authority and you are here this evening because the building inspector has determined that your

proposed action is contrary to the city of fall Rivers's zoning ordinances the city Charter section 9-18 mandates that all multiple member bodies developed and adopt rules or policies for public comment we have adopted such a policy which in short provides for citizen input on zoning board specific matters at the end of the evening I declare disclose that a an official copy of the uh Fall River zoning ordinance is

available at the city clerk's office and that one should not rely upon the online version that being the case we are ready to open uh we have a change in the batting order uh with uh item number 01 being bypassed at this point is that correct no no you are going with 01 yes see I get confused easily item number 01 Tetro real real estate LLC care of Attorney Peter a selino subject property

is 102 Mis street map c-08 lot 14 the seeks a variance to divide the existing parcel into three lots leaving the existing dwelling on lot one and constructing a two family dwelling on each of lot two and lot three applicant seeks relief from 86 attachment one of the Fall River zoning ordinance by way of variance as to lot area affecting Lots two and three rear yard setback affecting lot two and lot

coverage affecting lot one the property is located in an R4 two family zoning District Council thank you good evening for the record my name is Peter selino I'm a lawyer here in Fall River my office is at 550 Locust Street I represent tetrol real estate the owner of the subject property this matter was tabled at the November hearing of this board so that we could uh sort of create

a more thoughtful proposal and so the proposal is as follows to divide the existing lot into three lots leaving the existing two family structure in the northeast corner on what is labeled as lot one to create lot two on which a proposed two family dwelling would be erected and to create lot three on which a single family home would be erected the lot uh sorry the waivers that are requested in conjunction with our

petition are as follows we are requesting a waiver of lot area to create lot two this is an R4 District so as the board knows we need 6,000 squ ft for the first apartment and 2,000 ft for each additional apartment and as you can see from Mr toman's plan lot two consists of 6,625 additionally we need rear yard setback as to lot two you can see um the top left corner which would be the

northwest corner of the proposed dwelling on lot two there's an issue with rear yard setback there and then finally lot coverage as it relates to lot one and lot two um the district requires 30% lot coverage and the proposal exceeds 30% on Lots one and lot two lot three is otherwise intended to be a conforming single family lot uh it's submitted in my filing that I believe that the hardship associated

with this particular site is the existence of the two family dwellings sort of hugging the North and the East property line and then having this plentiful uh sidey lot if you will um so Mr tomman is here to answer obviously any engineering questions I'm happy to answer any uh questions the board may have of me relative to my client's proposal okay first question that I have uh to you uh Mr tomman is the

dwelling on lot two on this plan larger than the dwelling in lot two on the original plan that was submitted last month oh shoot I I don't know what the original size was um to be honest with you what was the relief being sought at that point for uh similar it was similar relief on l two yeah no I'm just wondering CU that lot lot two is at 47% yeah so so the structure um is

bigger on the revised plan is correct it's up on the screen Joe the first plan yep oh thank you y so it was a a 40 by uh I believe 40 by 30 initially or 40 by 32 okay and the driveway is now moving to U you have one of the driveways moving to Eclipse Street correct just to separate them and um cuz otherwise it' be too tight to the

corner um to have them both come out on meon Street now on the current plans the revised plans for lot three we're stating that it is a conforming single house lot I need to verify that um but you're asking for a two and you really haven't given us a footprint on that on the new plans we're not asking for a two on lot three it's a one it's a conforming single family single it'll meet all the

requirements all right so that is is conforming as far as coverage and me all setbacks and obviously front Frontage is on Eclipse okay uh other questions from the

board nothing I'll go to the public we can come back um turning to and we do have a a letter on this one as well we do have correspondents on this Mr chairman since we didn't read I know we did not read in the opposition correct re question was the table was made prior to any presentation so we might want to reference the original letters of opposition or petition that we're submitt I think we

had one correct Patty or do we have two we had two let's go to support first is there anyone here that wishes to speak in favor of the petition see none is there anyone here who wishes to speak in opposition before I read in I'll take I'll take you and the that corner first yep you raised your hand the highest the quickest so I knew you had I knew you

had the answer can I read what I wrote absolutely okay we need your name and address my name is Elizabeth cabal and I'm from 116 my property is on the side of the building that's already on my house is on the side of lot one okay um I spent much of my childhood and fall over attending Osborne Street School in my early years riding my bike and playing with my friends in the

neighborhood my husband was also born and raised here when we searched for a home to purchase 12 years ago we had a clear list of priorities space for a growing family a yard for our children to enjoy and a safe Street for them to ride their bikes safety and neighborhood character were Paramount we initially sought a home in an established neighborhood with an ample space between houses as we were strongly opposed to

the idea of being smooshed like St sardines I was stationed in other parts of the country while in the Army and my husband lived South for a while however forever has always felt like home it is where we chose to invest in in building our lives together we ultimately found our Dream Home on H Street where we have raised our family and created countless memories it is the street where our

children learn to ride bikes and scooters in our neighborhood and our neighbor across the street frequently has his grandchildren riding their bikes here as well however traffic has become a growing concern drivers often fail to stop at the stop sign intersection of me and and Eclipse speeding down the street and creating hazardous a hazardous environment for my children I always

understood that the property next door would eventually sell and be developed likely requiring the removal of tree on the lot however the proposal to construct not one but two duplexes now uh one duplex and one single family is deeply troubling this type of development would fundamentally Al the character of our neighborhood I understand that Financial considerations often Drive such such projects but I

respectfully ask that the Investments made by current residents our homes our time and our commitment to the community also be taken into account for over a decade we have worked to maintain and enhance the beauty of our neighborhood and I strongly urge the council to consider allowing only one single family to be built on the property or two single families this would preserve the integ of the neighborhood and

provide another family with the same opportunities to meaning meaningfully create the same memories that my family has enjoy Additionally the proposed development raises practical concerns parking will be insufficient as no one in our neighborhood currently parks in the street the lack of side sidewalks further exasperates this issue if vehicles are parked in front of my house for instance our mail is not delivered

because the inconvenience to the mail carrier traffic has already increased in recent years and the failure of drivers to stop at the intersection only adds to the risks if two homes must be must be built I ask that they be single families while the house next to mine is technically a two family structure it has been used as a single family for the past 11 years and according to neighbors

many years before that as well I am encouraged by follower his progress including the development of the train line and the growth of local businesses however I believe it is it is possible to balance progress with preserving the character and State of our neighborhoods as the city moves forward I ask that you consider the families and the homeowners who have invested in this in this

community in some cases for Generations can we preserve the wholesome quality of these neighborhoods rather than overdeveloping them to pursue a profit I respectfully ask the council consider my ask here thank you so much thank you is there anyone else who wishes to speak in opposition there ra hands up lady I'm col Calo when I live at 35 Street and I agree with everything that Mrs Cab just brought up we were only

just told about this revision that he's planning on one instead of the two duplexes even though we went to City Hall today andion was presented realize one you came in after me I said no I didn't realize if there was so we're totally unprepared so when I refer to this addition as 12 12 houses on one corner we're only reducing it to 11 and while they have a driveway if if there's three two family

houses on that corner with enough parking for two cars that's in the hopes that there's only going to be two cars per family so we could see 12 cars on that one corner we have new new couple that moved across the street from us three vehicles we have a couple that live next door to them five vehicles these vehicles are not going to have enough room to park on that corner and

it's going to create a dangerous situation not to mention ruin the characteristic of single family homes and while I understand it is zoned for two family that was back in 1930 when the family who built that home built it for a family and only family has ever lived in that house only one family for 50 years there's never been two families in that corner so just because we can doesn't

necessarily mean we should that corner with all that all those people living there is going to ruin the whole neighborhood characteristic not only that it's going to be causing some dangerous a dangerous situation in that cor okay appreciate your input sir uh my name is Joshua P I live on 16 miss stre my wife Elizabeth um the biggest issue I have um we always knew it was going to be developed at some

point um we're okay with two single family homes in that corner no issue at all as far as that's concerned the biggest issue that we face on E Street realistically is that we don't have any sidewalks so anytime that anybody has a party or even say for instance the Liberal Club they have their end of the year uh Feast there everyone parks on the street and when you have two cars on

the street you know one on the right side one on the left side it becomes a oneway stre and everyone freezes right through Eclipse Street and comes down meon because that's the throughway so it causes hazardous conditions but more so than that the reason why we bought our home like my wife was saying is you know it was a single family home street a lot of the streets in the area are single

family homes and that's why we chose to live on that side of the city like I said I'm not opposed at all to two single family homes whatsoever and I understand you know um what they're trying to do and I get it um because I would try to do the same thing too but two families two single family homes is is what I think the neighborhood agrees to and it would keep the characteristic

of the neighborhood the way that it is but it also keep it safe as well um you know we're we're a family of five and we have three cars now we have an 18-year-old who has a a vehicle so now there's three cars and we only have two spots in our driveway so I park on the grass until I can afford to PVE the rest of my driveway so to keep my vehicle off

the street because it's unsafe to keep vehicles on the street um and I think everyone that lives on the street here today and that's not here today can attest that and that's why no one park on the so okay thank you very much anyone else in opposite I kind of heard the word hardship thr in there and I find it very hard to believe that it would be a hardship for two single

family homes on that street that developer would get back more than his investment with two single family homes there's no hardship whatsoever there the hardship would be on and and hardship for intents and purposes usually comes up with shape of the lot size of the lot topography figure features that type of thing usually not monetary so can be but we'll cover that in next next month

semester Mr Caulkins hey nice to see you nice to be seen and and not viewed yes did you have a question down here I thought somebody had the hand up is there anyone else in opposition we do have uh another letter that came in uh actually in form a petition it's signed by 13 um 13 neighbors uh this is address the city of Fall River planning board regarding variance request map co8 lot 14 102

Mison Street variance city planners and board members we as residents um newer and some 25 to over 30 years on me me I'm sorry meon Street Fall River uh all of us neighbors of this area are concerned over this variance request we feel building two duplex homes on this piece of property would have a negative impact on what currently is an uh is a urban neighborhood sorry uh in the whole city this piece of

property is zoned for two family the existing house was built in 1930 and was for one two family home the home has been occupied by only one family for the last 50 years adding two additional duplexes will increase this one corner by four families bringing the total to six families living on one corner property while the map shows a driveway for each unit uh these will only accommodate two cars per family uh

currently there are car no cars parked on the street on Mis Street there is no room for Street on street parking there are no sidewalks available either buildings are being allowed Builders are being allowed to come into a quiet neighborhood and building as much as they can for a quick profit leaving houses on top of each other and then returning to their own neighborhoods not caring about destroying our quiet

peaceful safe neighborhood the same Builder requesting this variance has already purchased a home at the corner of me and Laurel Street uh and got a variance to build a second home on the property that has been a one family since 1925 uh they are adding a driveway to enter on Laurel Street uh and on a very dangerous curve uh in the road and we we people speed accidents will happen these Builders want the the

quickest and biggest payoff profit Etc not caring about Neighbors what will happen when uh which is already happening on Laurel Street cars are parked on the lawn and uh in street because houses are on top of each other we do not want to see neighborhoods ruined and crowded and unsafe with our children riding bicycles Etc we all take pride in our Lawns Etc and have immense Pride we see a huge safety concern that

comes with adding too many tenants in one corner please consider consider coming to Mison Street and observing how quiet and well manicured our single family homes are we would much rather see single family homes rather than duplexes which uh will devalue our properties and character of our neighborhood uh nevermine duplex houses uh which is a gross build which will overcrowd the ne the lovely neighborhood

uh thank you sincerely for your time and uh please consider uh our sincere neighborhood our Serene neighborhood staying that way um meon street is one of the last uh decent areas to live in the city I do not uh please do not allow this Builder to turn this into a cluster on tenants uh sincerely thank you and it's signed by 13 uh abutters or nearby Neighbors in that uh to that piece of

property Council if I may ask do you know uh um if your client had any conversations with some of the neighbors out there was there any input did he en it or okay um had he considered two single families I realize it's a it's a two family neighborhood I realize that quite honestly when some of you folks sell your houses somebody's going to come in years from now and probably turn them into two families but

I won't be sitting here um had he considered doing two single families on this just just curious uh we hadn't to this point but I think that I'd like to make a motion to table this petition to consider that option given the output uh of the neighborhood okay I think I think that might be wise you're also not on that top lot the Northwest lot you're not even showing where the the driveway might be Etc

so um not that it you've got the setback so it's not a problem but I'm just kind of curious where everything's going to spill out we have a request from the petitioners councel uh to table can we have that in form of motion if we desire it Mr chairman I would move that we Grant the motion to table very good do we have a second on that motion motion

and second on then on the uh motion then uh John yes um Jim I that's true you came in late um Dan yes Ricky yes Eric yes chairman Prairie yes thank you very much thank you folks thank you for coming out I'll remind you that you will not receive a new notice so be Weare tonight and tell your neighbors that this is moved off to next month what's the date of the January meeting 16th January

16th thank you all for coming out

appre it should be available in the planning office so

I just to know that when we say you know 12 more cars or six families that the numbers are the numbers are the same so revised plans are required one week before the hearing to be submitted to our office so by the end of business on the Thursday before the meeting that plan will be in our office otherwise it cannot be heard at the following week's meeting okay okay thank you folks and you don't have

to come down you can call give us your email address and I'll email you a copy of the plan okay okay thank you thank you thank you have a good evening have a great holiday thank you thank you everybody we are going slightly out of order um we're in new business now and item number two of new business will be taken next uh this is for 37 Park Street uh partner LLC care of Attorney Peter aino

subject property is 37 Park Street that's map go6 Lots 29 and 28 um in descending order the applicant seeks a variance to convert the existing pre the pre-existing non-conforming structure into 68 residential apartment units waving um lot area and dimensional requirements a special permit uh under Section 86 - 441 to reduce the number of parking spaces from the required 336 parking spaces to 75 parking spaces

property is located in an A2 apartment zoning District good evening for the record Peter Felino on behalf of the applicant petitioner 37 Park Street Partners LLC I would like to thank attorney Frank for allowing us to go out of order to facilitate this petition um the petition before you has been before you previously and I've noted that on my filing this matter was before you in August of 2022 at that time we were

proposing to convert the existing structure into office space for St ANS hospital as a result of the failure of steart healthc care that deal fell apart and as a result my clients left with a vacant and dilapidated building and so therefore we're coming to you with a new proposal this evening The Proposal is to construct 68 apartments that would be Market R housing in the existing

structure we proposed to have 75 on stre onite parking spaces off Street um the bedroom counts that are being proposed are 25 studio 25 one-bedroom and 18 two-bedrooms the variances being sought are for lot area because this is an A2 zoning district and there's no way we can even come close to complying with the area requirements in the district further we're seeking a variance for loot coverage given the plentiful

parking we're providing and finally not withstanding that plentiful parking we are still short and therefore seeking a special permit to effectively go one to one uh or a little better than one: one with 75 parking spaces one loading space for 68 total units um I'd submit to you that the hardship in this petition is certainly the existence of the structure um the structure was built in the 1800s for

purposes of a Convent um it's in poor condition needs a lot of work my clients indicated that this is approximately a $17 million project to convert this into 68 units so we think it's a great project for the city um Mr tomman can answer any engineering questions I'd be happy to answer any legal or proposal type questions thank you for uh the apartment mix up front and thanks to your client

for a second bite at trying to uh trying to save this building um my question and and I'm sure a question that others will have is in regard to the park coming down to 75 was there any thought given of trying to locate and I realize this is crowded neighborhood but got to ask the question uh trying to locate and other property nearby where parking could be accommodated additional parking no I

mean that was to you mean to acquire or just to lease after my last round with this I would say acquire if possible yeah no um it's a tight neighborhood obviously and there's not a lot in that area I don't know where you'd find that additional you know if we were going to go by two spaces per I don't know where You' come up with that amount of parking even

within a half mile if that was the requirement had to ask a question wanted it on the record any comments on this from uh um my first question would be I'm I'm assuming that the curb openings along Park Street would be modified gain access to the the parking the two re parking lots correct yeah they they would both come in um they would be separated by the retaining wall going down the middle one at one level

one at the other with two separate entrances because there's a severe elevation difference right correct in the back so Topography is a little bit off um I think it's a great project um I actually think this may be less of a parking detriment than the medical office use that was previously approved um I have solace in the fact that South Main Street and the Ring Road around Kennedy Park is available for parking

correct yes when mass is in session if it ever does come back fully or when there is a funeral uh luckily o just down the street has an incredibly large parking lot so they've been able to take all of their vehicles off of the street and and keep them inhouse um this is greater than 1:1 1:1 has been the standard for projects like this when we have a developer creating market rate

housing at lower bedroom counts than would be expected um like the renovations of Mills or existing schools so this actually exceeds the one to one requirement that we've allowed them to pass down that and there is some decent available uh on street parking as well stor water management will be an issue because of the lot coverage but that's an engineering and site plan review thing um so there'll be some greater

levels of infiltration that'll be required for that but that can be offset by drainage design no I think it'll be a great way to save this building and uh I think we could get there yeah and I think from a business standpoint the 25 Studios 251s is probably great because you're going to get young professionals into that type of uh that type of smaller unit not not looking at the two or three

bedrooms uh any other questions from the board please n if I can add just one other thing um only because this is coming up and I ask often so we've had multiple Mill renovation projects where we've granted this kind of relief for the parking uh King Philip Mill just recently opened yep um that developer has done that is their fourth Mill every one of their Mills has seen generally the same relief

and I ask do you guys find that you're having an issue with parking or being able to find tenants and they they tell me we have too much parking which you can't go less than that but uh they say they have ample parking for the types of tenants that they're bringing into these buildings which I would expect to be a similar Market in this building most likely that's all I have okay I

appreciate that that's good is there anyone uh present this evening that would like to speak uh in favor of this development good afternoon Mr chairman members of the board uh for the record my name is Ken foler I'm the Executive Vice President of the Bristol County I'd like to speak um in favor on behalf of this project as you may recall this project was previously approved as councelor Selena had stated for uh

medical use uh in the terms of office use as well as administrative uses and it had a lot more Associated activity level with the property itself as opposed to the residential use that's being proposed today the building itself uh needs to be tended to as a continues is falling into dis repair it's a beautiful building that's in need of such assistance and reutilization um the use of this

property for residential purposes I think will be a nice complement to the the new lifespan use that's going to be located next door you can clearly Envision the possibility of nurses and other medical professionals living in this building and also working next door so which would be a nice uh enhancement to the neighborhood um the proposed uh budget for this is inaccess of $17 million for its rehab uh such an

investment in this type of uh building will will also I believe enhance other properties around the area so it's not going to be detrimental to the abing properties and you know given its current state the need for its reuse and the ability to potentially complement the lifespan Brown University utilization of the hospital property I think it makes a lot of sense for the uh for the city and for the neighborhood on

the fact that they are going to be market rate units the fact that they're going to have studio apartments um seem to be you know in The Sweet Spot of what's being rented out right now within the city so for all those purposes I hope the board would see them see fit to approve this project before very good thank you very much anyone else wishing to speak in favor yes my name is James 48 Park Street

which is directly across the street um so I was here two years ago um when I was propos as uh offices and uh unfortunate that that wasn't able to go forward um but I do stand in support of uh this project um I think we can all agree it is the the building continues to deteriorate if nothing is done with it um and it is an historic building as

was pointed out built in the 1800s um so uh I would like to see something done with it at this point um the apartments I think would be uh a good use given the shortage of ping in the city um I do have some concern about the pocket um I I haven't heard that other Mills that have been turned into Apartments um they find that they have too much parking that is good to hear so maybe

the proposal is is adequate I do know when we were here two years ago there was talk about putting a plat like a raised platform similar to the one that's in use at primac camp and I just don't know if that would be something that should be considered to add parking spaces because it it is very it is a very busy neighborhood and is very tight for parking I I have a driveway but um

I've come out a couple of times and you know people are trying to squeeze into parking spaces on the street and they sometimes can block your your driveway but I you know so it's not so much for me I think it's for the other residents in the neighborhood um who have to park on the street so um so I am in support of it but I do have that so I'll offer this the medical use in

our parking requirements which goes by square footage basically requires more parking for the size of the building that it was so that predicated the absolute need for those additional spaces and then that's during a very concentrated time between the business hours of 9 to 5 let's say like when the schools were open you only saw a traffic and a parking issue during opening and closing this is a a 24hour

operation now as people will be will be living here um backing up you know to that when we when we look at some of the other facilities and they say that the parking has been okay um the developer is moving forward and through their marketing analysis with the understanding of their tenants that this will meet their needs if they find that they unable to rent units they will be building a parking garage for sure to

meet their parking demand so they do have the ability to increase parking if it need be um but their Market study apparently shows that the one to1 rate which has been you know throughout the area sacred hot school for instance was just redone similar similar parking um that'll be coming online Rel soon as well so um if we didn't have South Main Street and the Ring Road around the park

to help then I I would be a little bit more concerned but in my opinion I think we we'll be okay and they the fail safe of if they need to add more they can I I feel better listening to that the experiences with other properties yeah we we I mean I give recommendations to the board all the time it has to be based on fact so anytime someone completes one of these projects we

follow up and because what we try to get an understanding of our zoning and doesn't need to be changed and the only way you get to do that is so you can take studies out of other areas but other areas aren't Fall River we're not Boston people have cars you know people that live in a 68 unit building in Boston none of them have cars so there are zero parking requirements in areas

like provin or Boston but we're not there especially in this location but otherwise I think it's a project great thank you very much anyone else wishing to speak in favor is there anyone wishing to speak in opposition all right there there being none I turn back to the board with any uh any questions or comments you'd like to make at this point I'll make a motion to Grant if there's no further

discussion second there's a Vance and special permit yes yes it is so you need to take separately both we should I I would do it separately because the way Pat and I have started writing decisions is we've broken them down by relief so it would help if you took the vote separately as well okay I'll make a motion on the variance to convert the pre-existing non-conforming structure into 68 residential units

second okay and that that is covering uh the coverage yeah that's that's the I I'm just making a point that's that's yeah everything that pertains the only thing the special permit is for is the parking reduction correct correct so as long as we keep those separate then we'll be fine any discussion on the motion in that case on the motion Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes John yes chairman per yes

and I'll make a motion to Grant a special permit for the reduction of parking from SE uh from 136 to 75 on a one: one plus ratio very good do we have a second second second by Dan discussion hearing none on the motion Rick yes Dan yes Jim yes John yes and myself yes conratulations good luck going back into the batting order item number one under new business excuse me mask number one LLC

care of attorney Arthur D Frank Jr subject property is 1476 Pleasant Street map K12 lot three the applicant is requesting a special permit to extend the current non-conforming use from 11 to 16 apartments by adding five one-bedroom apartments in accordance with Section 86- 424 waving dimensional and parking requirements the property is located in a BL local business zoning District

Council good evening Mr chairman members of the board uh Mr agar and uh Madame clerk for the record my name is Arthur Frank I'm a lawyer with an address of 209 Bedford Street for Massachusetts with me tonight is Mr Jean Pro field he is the manager of mass guess it's hash1 LLC mass1 ash1 LLC uh some of you may remember this property he was before you a little over two years ago he came in

looking for additional Apartments but at that time he was looking for multi-bedroom apartments at the time I believe he wanted two two bedrooms two three bedrooms and one one one-bedroom the board did not act favorably upon that petition but under the statute more than two years has elapsed so now he's back before you seeking permission to put five units in all one bedroom units uh we feel that this is a need that

um that that's could be addressed uh in on Pleasant Street we all know that the um our elected officials are looking to improve Pleasant Street and they're also looking to create Market rent apartments Mr Pro Field's current apartments rent for $1,400 and he includes water sewer heat electricity and Wi-Fi now I went on and checked what the some of the median rents are in Fall River for one-bedroom

apartments apartment adviser tells me that a median rent is 14453 for 664 Square ft apartment.com lists a a a median rent of 154 4 per month and Zillow has a median rent of 1,700 so he's looking to create some apartments that are going to be very very affordable versus what's already on the market uh and his units are going to average 7928 Square ft the smallest will be 504 ft and the largest will be

946 ft so he's he's going to build out some some good size of Apartments uh we do need the the the special permit for parking because as you can see the building takes up almost the entire parcel and if you look at the surrounding Parcels I think he's the only person who takes up so much area on the lot but it is Pleasant Street there are park there is parking on the street

and from what he tells me of his current 11 units not everybody has a car a lot of his people take the bus as we know the S of bus runs up and down Pleasant Street so we figure that at most if you're if you grant this request maybe five more cars will be on and around the streets of of uh around the building so we don't expect there to be a glut of

cars uh on the street from the new tenants uh we feel it's a good project that currently the third floor has never been in use uh or it has been used for a number of of years uh his bank has already approved a budget of $400,000 that he wants to invest in this building so we feel from a lot of different facets he wants to invest in an area that the elected officials have

said please will people try to invest in Pleasant Street I know Community Development is giving out grants to fix up storefronts uh he'd like to do his part obviously he believes that he could make a good profit from at adding these five additional units if you have any other questions Mr profield is more than happy to try to answer them okay one question especially you're running 11 Apartments there now what are

you doing as far as uh as far as trash removal where where is that the we have bucket on the side in every on that walkway yes okay and that that proves sufficient no issue yeah okay he he also provides laundry services in the building for all the tenants um he put a new roof on not too long ago November and he's also prepared to expand the sprinkler system obviously for the third

floor and I guess the building was problematic when he bought it three years ago with people getting into the building that shouldn't be in there but he's been able to I guess address safety concerns with cameras um I think there if one he explained to me there's a vest now where you have to go through two doors to get inside so he's tried to make the building safe and secure and

and he would like now uh that to see if this board will act favorably and give him five more one one-bedroom apartments okay great thank you uh can I turn to planning first yeah um just a couple of questions the existing units on the first and second floor is nothing changing on those no correct okay so all the renovations are on this third floor um the access requirements through the

building Department to ESS is already in place that's fine you're not going to lose anything on the first or second or have to make modifications to first and second to get th okay um I would just want to call to the the board members plans is the only concern that I would have is when I look at the site plan for the layout of the units each of the units has a den and an

office um so if if you do vote you should vote that they have to be one-bedroom units and no room no other rooms that could qualify under the building code as a bedroom can be constructed it'll be up to the building inspector to uh to enforce that um but when you look at the building plans um there are two other rooms that could be considered bedrooms we would we would live at that

restriction yeah something something however you want to word it um you know one office I can understand but now when you're adding it office anaden is there really much of a difference to that but I don't know y um so there should be some teeth and or give the building enforcement officials some teeth to be able to enforce ensuring that these are only one bedrooms are to be rented only as one bedrooms

um yep because what's going to happen is when when this gentleman wants to sell the building it's going to be sell sold as three more units with three bedrooms in each so right parking um I will add directly across the street or within a block or two there is an underutilized Municipal parking lot in the Flint that no one knows about it's actually behind um where the furniture store used

to be that Mr Campos owns it was a theater originally you know what it was so there's did you go down I don't know whether it's it's not Janks so but it's over in that area cashh I mean a huge parking lot and we've actually talked in house about making improvements to that lot so that we can provide this Flint neighborhood none of these properties have off street parking we just handled

the one at the corner of pleasant at Eastern Avenue two meetings ago um yeah so the ability to have that off street parking available for tenants that do need it um we we're working on that on our end as well as making some improvements to that it's perfectly accessible now and you can use it um but we should maintain it better clean we should have security that's better there are other locations to get to you see

it let me ask on and and it's it is a building department matter or inspectional Services matter but on the the second means of eag rest for for safety I mean I'm only asking because you're you're squeezed onto this lot are you using fire escapes are you using everything internal to the building to have that second means of eress oh is uh in the third floor we have two stairs uh

on each side of the uh third floor okay all right I I think Mr chairman at one time they may have been dwelling units in that third floor and I don't know what happened to them but I think the way the building was it's just one big space now isn't it I I believe they used to have some kind of K karate school or on the third floor a boxing oh was like

a was a dance school or a karate school or something like that yeah okay better his apartments on the karate school yeah any questions from the board yes does anybody want to look at the floor plans sorry before you have copies 11 the last couple of one

yes yeah you can see the office the yeah the office is bigger than the bedroom

so except for except for naming was the intention that for example unit uh unit two would be a two-bedroom initially unit three would be a a three-bedroom initially was that the original yes yes it was and um we change everything to one bedroom but uh I'm willing to do whatever you guys else to do well I'll be honest with you that much space for, 1400 is uh it's quite the deal

okay thanks for sharing that I thought that's that's what we had looked at two years ago was was and and when it comes to the building code they may look at does it have a window I think they have Windows does it have a closet if that is the qualifying does it have a door um those sometimes those are the qualifying yeah things for a but that doesn't mean that

that's how they're going to be used so yeah I think it's important for um building plans and rent and insurance on the building you know if the building's being occupied as three bedrooms and the building Burns insurance doesn't cover if it has to do something with the additional occupy in the building and I wouldn't want to see something happen to someone that they've got three bedrooms

full of three people each and somebody doesn't get out legal occupancy y however you want to word it I put it in the hands of the building department to enforce that's I'm more comforable with that any other questions from the board anything else stand I'll let you go through that let's go to the general public is there anybody here wishing to speak in favor of the uh petition anyone wishing to speak in opposition

okay so they're hearing none it comes back to us if there's any questions ask them now and if not let's move to a uh move to a motion please so Mr chairman um as a special permit this is bated is that correct yeah so I would have I would make the motion initially that the project is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood okay do we have a second on that motion motion and second on the

motion Ricky yes Dan yes yes John yes and chairman fie yes and then I would make the motion that we Grant on the petition with the provisor that the additional five units remain one bedroom should that give uh code enforcement enough teeth it it should Mr chairman I just think the wording might be that the existing or that the units be limited to no more than one bedroom one qualifying one bedroom how's that

qualifying one bedroom under the bill yeah okay something like that you amendable to that yes okay you have a second on that I'm giving this one to Jim he came in late I want to give him that got to show up somehow then on the motion for approval John no Jim yes Dan yes Ricky yes chairman prair yes is a chairman point of order yes you need a vote for special permit under

86445 to wave the parking because there is adequate true uh on street parking and there was also the municipal lot that Mr Rager I think the intention was that that second special permit covered okay go but that's fine if that's the boy's intention then I'm okay with that yeah there shouldn't be any to uh as be WR that way as presented okay thank you very much thank you all right where are we item number

three Marlene e Abad care of Attorney Peter a solino subject property is 150 Baker Street map F10 uh F10 lot three the applicant is requesting a variance to construct a two family dwelling waving Frontage area and lot coverage requirements in an r42 family zoning District the specific ordinance reference is 86 attachment one of the Fall River zoning ordinance good evening for the record my name is Peter selino I

represent the petitioner Marlene Abad who's here with me to my left she's the property owner the petition before you members of the board is a petition to erect a two family dwelling on an existing vacant lot historically uh there had been a dwelling on the lot that burned down my client purchased the lot came before the board seeking relief in April which was declined came to see

me we I think redesigned the proposal in a manner that is thoughtful uh including the side by side uh concept with decks in the back and parking in the front The Proposal uh requires two waivers uh one is the square footage or area requirement in the R4 district and the other is the frontage uh specifically she has 60 ft but she needs 75 in the district um so we'd submit to you that

this is a much cleaner and better design and petition than the prior petition that the board denied um we did hardly go before the planning board for a repetitive petition and that's how we got here uh tonight so we're happy to answer any questions relative to the proposal if the board has any okay just a question do we have to vote that we do not consider this or that make the vote that you also make

the determination through the planning Bo process but that's the first step that you have to take significantly different yeah yeah um let me go to again planning first do you have any comments on the original proposal was a four original prop so multiple variances were granted for the Reconstruction of a four that had been had expired the most recent denial was 44 as well okay um so just on

the Bas of that M I would assern that clearly The Proposal before you tonight is substantially different than the purposes uh for which it was originally denied but we do need to have that in in record motion car are there hang on are there any other questions from the board at this point well just beside that then is there any other concern you have no well well first it's

let's get a vote why you get that vote through then we continue on with the hearing I'll other opinions M chairman I move that we find that the uh proposed variance is substantially different than that which was earlier turned down and that um Grant permission to proceed second motion and second on the motion John yes Jim yes Dan yes Ricky chairman Prairie yes okay so with that I'll give

you my next set of opin okay okay so uh of course the townhouse style as we've been seeing everywhere is the most economical and space saving economical for both dollars and economical for space uh for creating multiple multif family units the structure that's shown meets all the building setbacks which is a great thing uh including the decks uh to the rear of it SP this um parking now

no relief is needed where relief had previously been asked for the only relief needed for parking here would be the aisle width I believe from 22 ft to 20 um which is more than sufficient uh for accessing the four total parking spaces lot coverage again but when we look at what was previously non-conforming on this parcel um this is clearly an improvement than what was what was there before as far as the

density parking in the neighborhood I see no issue with it okay any other questions turning to the general public anyone here wishing to speak um in favor of the petition anyone wishing to speak in opposition they're hearing none we turn back to the board chairman I move granting of the variance second motion and second conditions shouldn't really be any necessary as as presented proposed all right questions

on the motion they hearing none uh John yes Jim yes Dan yes Ricky yes chairman Prairie yes thank you all right item number four anchor Holdings LLC care of Jeffrey tman 114 and 122 uh Davis Street map M13 lot 6 the applicant requires a special permit to deside the subject property into two lots leaving each four family dwelling on separate Lots section 86- 423b and a multifamily

zoning District uh good evening for the record Jeff Tolman from Northeast engineers and Consultants here on behalf of anchor Holdings LLC uh for the property at 11412 Davis Street um the property does contain two existing four family dwellings um both of which are located on the front or west side uh of the property um they are not stacked as you typically see with these type of filings um the property is located in

the multiple family M District uh the lot itself is an existing conforming lot with 9500 Square ft and 92 ft of Frontage on Davis Street um the houses are non-conforming uh due to front and re setback so what we're looking to do here and what what we're requesting is a special perimet under 866 423b um given the location of these dwellings this is probably as clean as a uh one of these filings the the 423 BS

that I've done um to the to the point where lot two is actually going to be a conforming lot having the adequate Frontage in area structure is still going to be nonconforming due to setbacks but the lot itself will be conforming so um the what we're proposing to do is to divide this basically right between the two houses when you factor in uh the porch location for number 122 will'll be about you know

4 ft plus or minus off of each structure uh number 14 sorry 114 and about 4 ft off of the porch at 122 um there is that that concrete area in the middle um which is a driveway um based on uh you know site observations and going back and looking at historical imagery here it really doesn't get used as a driveway it's more for um trash bin storage um just to make it easier uh to

get it out on the sidewalk and stuff like that so it's really not used for off street parking so uh therefore the division line going down the middle uh to me makes a lot of sense uh you're really not taking away a parking spot from you know one unit or one dwelling or the other so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that the board might have okay I have none at this

point anyone on the board with a question comment from planning just standard conditions of separated utilities which they probably are and I would suggest because of how that middle area gets used again no fencing along that interior line probably at least you get to the back line of the building or back of the concrete just to leave that open for Access I'm looking at Lot number two and

I'm tempted to to suggest no further subdivision because I can but then again you got some pretty Big Lots in this neighborhood so I'd be more concerned about those we'd be happy to accept that condition I mean I I don't anticipate any future development of it but um you never know you this is true we put we've put a lot of things on a little bit of land all right any other

questions all right very good anyone here wishing to speak in favor of the petition and support anyone wishing to speak in opposition you're hearing no comments this austa body now needs to make a decision so again special Comm icated yes yep okay make the motion that it is not substantially more detrimental to Second motion and second on the motion Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes John yes

chairman prair yes and then um I would move that we Grant the petition again with the provis that no further development no further subdivision no further subdivision be allowed on the prop separate utilities separate utilities and no separation they separated already Yes okay second motion and second on the motion then Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes John yes jman Prairie yes very good moving on to item number

five Shaker Investments LLC care of Jeffrey tman 27 wood bind Place map M25 Lot 37 the applicant seeks a variance to demolish the existing non-conforming warehouse and construct a proposed two family dwelling waving lot area and lot coverage in e g General residence zoning District good evening for the record Jeff Tolman from Northeast engineers and Consultants here on behalf of Shaker

Investments LLC the petitioner for this application uh this property is 27 wood by Place uh for those of you who are not familiar with this is it's it's on the off the west side of Grove Street located just south of chalton memorial hospital um there is an existing 1300t warehouse located on the northwest corner of the property um the property itself is located in the general General

residence G zoning District so therefore the warehousing use is not in allowed use uh the structure is also non-conforming in terms of D dimensional requirements uh due to front and side uh side yard setbacks um the history of the property the the the petitioners bought the property in February of 2024 um with the hopes of rehabbing it and converting it into a residential use taking it out of the warehousing use and

converted the residential the um after examining uh the existing structure was determined that it was in such disrepair it wasn't worth saving uh it's in pretty bad condition so what we're looking to do is and rather than utilize that footprint we're looking to raise that existing structure and construct a new uh two family dwelling further back on the property that would be uh conforming in terms of

setback requirements side rear front um the dwell the the structure itself would be a two- family dwelling uh we' provide for off Street parkings at the parking spaces at the front of the property uh Jason the Woodbine place um this is very similar to the situation that they have across the street with the um the Woodbine Place Condominium Association with a parking Arrangement similar to

this uh given the amount of traffic on wood Woodbine uh place I don't think that would be an issue backing out and and getting in and out of the uh uh the parking spaces there so the um what we what really we're the relief we're asking for here is lot area and lot coverage uh in terms of lot area the S the lot is undersized as it is uh

whether it be for a two or uh single family uh structure in the general residence Zone as it only has 4500 sare ft as opposed to the uh 5,000 or 6500 that would be required uh for each one of those dwellings and again um we are asking for lot coverage uh relief um the coverage uh the existing coverage is slightly over the allowed 25% and we're looking to um with this type of

development to provide the necessary off Street parking asset uh access sidewalks and stuff like that in the dwelling itself we're looking to bump that up to 69% okay so with that I'd be happy to answer any questions that the board might have okay I don't have any questions on this anyone else on the board I'm certainly not worried about traffic on wood bind um Dan anything from the planning aspect

on this no I mean it's I think it's great to get rid of the commercial use the only question I would have and I can't tell by the plan is I'm assuming wood bind plac is a private way I believe it is and I the only concern I would have is what is the width of the traveled way there and would these vehicles have the ability to to back out

into wood bind if someone pars that's a good question that's the only concern that I would have yeah cuz I swung down there I had never put wheels on Woodbine place I mean the only thing me there's an existing loading dock that's actually in the RightWay so if they were to put a vehicle there they the same issue to deal with I mean the existing building is I think less than 10 feet off of

Woodbine and there some type of platform there yes so loading would have been directly from Woodbine Street yeah I'm not sure the exact pavement width there but I I'm pretty sure it takes up the majority of the right away um so it is suitable withd I believe to to accommodate the parking as we're showing it on the plan here yeah I don't think it's a I don't think it's a 40t layout

but maybe but but the payment isn't you know it it's not reduced as to this you know in the same manner as the the layout itself believe it's over 20 it's probably 22 24 ft wide yeah any other questions from the board anyone here wishing to speak in favor anyone here wishing to speak in opposition they're hearing none comes to the board Mr chair I'll make a motion to Grant second okay motion to Grant seconded any

discussion they're hearing none on the motion John yes Jim yes Dan yes Ricky yes yes and chairman Prairie yes thank you I can see the temptation to want to turn that into a house cuz it's kind of a cool looking building but it is but once you one one bad wind storm and that thing is history okay very good thank you thank you have a good Christmas Merry Christmas moving on to item six Marilla

Lopes K of Attorney Peter a selino subject property is 177 PL street map m 09 Lot 4 applicant seeks a variance to convert the existing one stall garage into an appointment only one station hair salon uh waving use and off street parking requirements and an M multip multiple Family Residence zoning District good evening good evening for the record Peter solino on behalf of the petitioner merilla Lopes she is

immediately to my left she's the property owner at 177 Plain Street in Fall River the subject property is in an M zoning District The Proposal is to turn the existing garage which is under the house uh to the right if you're in Plain Street into a one station hair salon uh we had some great back and forth with the building inspector Rel relative to whether or not this is a home occupation

what constitutes a home occupation uh he concluded that we needed to come before the board and so that's why we're here um The Proposal would have a one station um salon on uh by appointment only and uh obviously my client lives in the property currently they do not use the driveway uh that is shown she and her husband park on the street she also told me that um that's never been a problem

for her in terms of finding parking so the relief s is related to use and parking I PL it as a variance for financial reasons uh and sorry what I mean by that is I PL it by a variance uh because to avoid the additional filing fee yep are you are you in a different salon right now do you have a chair in somebody else's Salon or just curious if

I had a salon on South Main Street but I bought a single family with the intention to bring a salon into my garage I had to close the other one I can't afford it to pay the mortgage and pay the rent in the other Salon y I understand property is expensive um this would be a use variant obviously because we're we'd be adding a home occupation in a residential district um Dan comments from planning

at this point the use I don't have an issue with specifically when attorney selino was trying to move this as a home occupation the only concern I have with the plan is that it references resident and employee parking there shall be no employees this is to be utilized only by the occupant of the home uh for one shair and two I think you will have a problem with allowing customers to park

in front of your driveway although it shows it there don't vote based on that because they will ticket you all the time they can park there if they choose to but we can't approve it the way that it should so what I would recommend is that the requirement for the on Street space not be approved and that this should be owner occupied using this the salon only and that there ought to be no other

employees that would be was was your intention to have a a SE an additional employee no okay so the employee is you I am and your Park in there anyway okay yeah I had um I mean is is there room that that a customer could pull into your driveway yes possibly yes so I mean if if the space is open during the day if your husband's at work or there's only one

vehicle my husband think about that my husband go to work from um 5: to any time after 6:00 p.m. and my schedule it's from 10: to 5:00 p.m. and it don't open Sundays and Mondays all right so with that said let's let's talk about hours of operation yeah U so that we can get that tied down and then then um we might want to discuss signage the ability to have any

yeah yeah and by the way we would not have the authority to give the on street parking to block a driveway anyway we'd be violating our own bylaws all right so hours of operation you said it's Tuesday through Saturday from 10 to 5 okay attorney selino has any thought been given to a sign sign yes I guess she would like a sign uh do you know the dimensions that would be a separate thing would

I you could cover all in the same variance if you chose to because with the site depending upon the sign it could have qualified special chose to but it could be wrapped up in this decision but just move cautiously on the size that we allow for a sign because in past practice it's been relatively small you remember a few years ago there's a an attorney on President Avenue at the corner of President Avenue at correct

Robison Street uh sorry yeah yeah that was it no it wasn't robon next street was it next street down Madison a couple street was a daycare there was a daycare on president President Avenue there was also this attorney so I would recommend nothing larger than 18 by 24 fixed to the side of the building yeah not illuminated um I have no problem with signage but um I was in the dock as to how big we would

allow yeah think 18 by 24 I think that's sufficient so 18 by 24 that's pretty small right it's foot and a half by two so that's 2T foot and a half high it's cuz I already have one but I I I don't call the size by had but it's fine I can just customize another one okay it's just because it's a house right right and my think is when a client get there they might be okay

where's this place well you put the sign where the door is yeah that that' probably be best and not fre standing attached to the building attached to the building not 18 by 18 by doesn't have to be large okay we there saying they and when we say attached it doesn't have to be flat to the house it be you know it can be double-sided it can have a you

know a metal bar off the face of the building that's double-sided 18 by 24 so you can see it as you're driving on either side of the street okay that's perfect it needs to be a fix to the building not on a separate pole again my recommendation and not a I mean you can have lights on it or in it uh the one I had it doesn't have a lights okay so you're okay without

lights yeah okay all right we accept those conditions I also would suggest on your hours of operation while right now you don't want to work on Monday you may get somebody that wants an appointment and you not restrict yourself and you know I'd say Monday through Saturday and and not not you don't have to work it okay but you can thank you for that y must be Christmas joh we we modifi

um I mean salons Barber Shop uh according to the holidays so we close few days for holidays but we might have to work all Mondays yeah well see if you put the restriction on your hours in your in your uh application then you couldn't do that right your license will have to read by yes whatever this relief is I take I take Monday through Saturday you need to rest on Sunday you

don't need to only that's from my family all right with that hashed out anyone here to speak in opposition or in favor anyone wish to speak in opposition I try to get Jeff to jump in for you fa on the record I'm in favor thank you Jeff it must be Christmas yes what do we want to do kids Mr chairman I move we Grant approval of the um very as requested

with hours of operation limited to uh was it 10 Monday through Saturday Monday through Saturday signage signage and no greater than any signage can be limited to non-illuminated uh 18 by 24 attached to the building yeah those are the conditions yes thank you second there's no second yet still work on do you want a second no I I think that I think those are the conditions that we right

discussed all right we have a motion and a second discussion on the motion you hearing none Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes John yes myself yes thank you thank you good that means you're okay citizen input no approval of minutes everybody got the minutes in the mail email Mr chairman I move waving of the reading of the minutes and approval of the same motion and second on the motion

Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes John I did not attend but yes I read them Ah that's right me yes okay motion toj nothing else we got to cover motion to adjourn is made second second on the motion all in favor I I opposed can stay here good news