2.15.2024 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 February 15 2024 we meeting at one government center in the first floor hearing room first went to Massachusetts General Law chapter 30A section 20 subsection F I hereby notify all persons and attendance that this meeting is being recorded with both video and audio devices by Fall River

government TV Mr Craig Salvador recording both video and audio version if anyone desires to make an audio video or combination recording thereof please notify me now and I should make a public announcement of your intention our recording secretary this evening is Miss Nina Krueger sitting to my immediate right present this evening are permanent members John Frank James Caulkins Dan deir Ricky sahi and

Alternate member ER Kelly also with us tonight is the director of engineering and planning Mr Dan agar sitting to my far left and Chris pereno the assistant planner sitting to my far right Nina 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 4A as amended yes in that

case I declare the February 18th of February 15th 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 before the board including the petitioners abutters anyone in support or anyone in opposition to the petition that your presentation should be limited to three minutes questions and responses must be

directed through the chair the board's rules and regulations direct the board to specific 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 petitioners and all interested persons that this is the zoning board of appeals the board's Authority exists personent to

Massachusetts General Law chapter 48 and is limited in scope and deals 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 and or use which is the subject of the petition before the board this evening the clerks in the building planning engineering and

Licensing departments are competent in the discharge of their duties as clerks they are however not lawyers and are not competent to give legal advice the action taken by 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 petition and after the decision of the board has been made for example there is a city ordinance

2015-1 I'm sorry -11 section 10-1 requiring site plan review a copy of the ordinance is available at the city clerk's office or from the planning department Department I remind everyone that the building inspector is the code 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 River's zoning ordinances the

city Charter section 9-18 mandates that all multi-member bodies develop and adopt rules or policies for public comment we have adopted such a policy which in short provides for citizens in input on zoning board specific matters at the end of the meeting I'll note that there is a signup sheet at the table just outside the door if you wish to speak at that time I disclose that an official copy of the

Fall River zoning ordinance is available at the city clerk's office one cannot rely on the online Zone ordinance with that let us begin under there is no old business under new business call in case number one Hyde Development LLC care of attorney Thomas P colorin 75 fth street map n-20 lot 55 the applicant seeks to convert the existing structure into 27 residential units the applicant seeks a

special permit first one to 86- 445a 86- 25A 86- 376a of this uh city of Fall River zoning ordinance to reduce the number of parking spaces wave applicable setback measurements front side and rear yard and to allow multifamily use in an aod Arts overlay District the property is located in a CBD Central Business zoning district and an aod Arts overlay District good evening Council good

evening Mr chairman members of the board for the record attorney Thomas Kor represented the applicant high high Development LLC uh as the chairman has stated we're here before you this evening uh seeking special permit relief with regard to the property located at 755th Street in full River uh I think many of you were on this board a year or year and a half or so ago um but uh by by way of background

this property came before you and I believe it was the September of 2022 hearing um essentially asking for the same relief there has been uh some slight modifications from the prior plan that was approved but per the terms of that decision um the variance was to be executed or excuse me the relief was to be executed with within one year and it has not been but again the plan that's

before the board tonight um is slightly different the overall premise Remains the Same there's an existing uh pre-existing non-conforming structure um as you can see from the plan it it sits pretty flush up against Fifth Street and the neighboring property uh the proposal is to convert this existing structure to 27 units uh there is a proposal uh just like there was last time to uh slightly

expand the building upward but not to expand the footprint at all uh the proposed height U once completed will be roughly around 58 ft the uh zoning ordinance um allows for up to 70 ft and will certainly stay within uh the parameters of the zoning ordinance uh one of the issues I think that that came up before the board um at the last hearing or one of the main concerns as expressed by the board was

the uh parking ratio uh the prior plan proposed 20 on-site parking spaces um and and I believe the developer at that point um secured uh some off street parking spaces as well uh we're happy to report that we were able to uh reconfigure the parking um and come up with 27 spaces so we'd be able to provide a onetoone uh one parking space per unit um on the property on site without

having to uh leave the premises uh the unit makeup again being 27 units proposed being 21 bedroom units and seven two bedroom units uh one of the things I did note uh on the plan and and preparing for tonight um you'll note the parking spaces that are along the building where has the number five with the circle around it are shown as compact parking spaces being 16 ft deep

um with a 22t drive a uh in between the parking spaces that sit on the rear of the property those um nine spaces uh that's actually an an an error what we're intending to do there is keep those parking spaces the five where it says 16 ft deep uh being 17 ft with the drrive vial 21 ft apart um that's consistent with the parking spaces that are going to be located um on the garage

level uh of the property as you can see there's um the ones that front along Fifth Street show 17 ft depth with a 21 ft Drive aisle so the ones on the um interior next area will be the same um in the sense that we'll have nothing less than 17 ft um the parking spaces um again the nine along the rear of the of the build excuse me rear of the property

uh will have will be 18 ft deep again but the minimum um being 17 ft deep on property uh again effectively we're looking for a a special permit um virtually identical to the relief that was previously granted um however we would suggest to the board that the one: one parking ratio that we're providing uh should be more than adequate um for the proposed use uh I would direct the

board's attention to some uh relief that was granted on some some nearby projects uh specifically the Merill building on Troy street um where it's my understanding that the parking uh was onsite parking was waved in its entirety um we're certainly not looking for any kind of dramatic relief like that um again being able to provide one spot um per unit and I would also Direct the board's attention uh to the property

being located in the Arts overlay District um one of the things that that the Arts overlay district is trying to stimulate is this type of development um a uh excuse me residential uses mixed with uh art uses trying to bring some Vitality to these neighborhoods and um repurposing an otherwise unused building um a building that's been bacon for some period of time I would suggest certainly

Falls um within what the hopes of what the Arts overlay district is trying to accomplish again to get bodies to get pedestrians down into these areas um and and breathing life back into these sections of the city uh so again what we're looking for is a special permit um we don't need any kind of variance relief from the board um we'd certainly suggest that the proposed use is not detrimental more detrimental to the

neighborhood um than what could otherwise be be placed there um obviously I'd be happy to uh entertain any questions uh from the board Mr chairman just one question attorney Corin yes um I do remember this coming before us in September of 22 I don't have the initial proposal in front of me um I'm just curious as to what you did to reconfigure to get to 27 from 20 fair question Mr Sahar if you bear

with me for one moment I can get out the prior plan so on the what I'll call the I'm trying to find the directional on here so the kind of the northwesterly side of the property with the nine parking spaces are located um what was previously proposed there was a total of eight spaces so we were able to get one more uh parking space there and then along the building where those five parking spaces are

located they didn't have any parking there um it looks like they had a a proposed loading area um that that we moved from that area and again we're able to get five parking spaces there was a a dumpster located in that area which we've shifted slightly to the Southwest um on our proposed plan that allowed us to get those five parking spaces there and then on the interior of the building um where they have the

three parking spaces on the again Northerly side uh we were able to reconfigure the the three spacers and get an extra one so a total of four up in that area and then and uh there was eight spaces along Fifth Street um and we were able to add one more space um in there Rick I think a big issue of what's changed on this plant is utilizing the location of the existing overhead door

that comes off of Fifth Street and accessing the parking inside of the building from that point rather than coming in through the rear parking area when you when you ate up a drive AIS to get into the building in the at grade parking lot that Aid up two or three spaces so by utilizing the driveway that's currently right off of Fifth Street that allowed you to create some additional spaces in that upper

parking area and allowed you to create the inside layout a little bit differently and also I believe this has probably a few more compact spaces than what was previously proposed on the original plan so in the original plan the overhead doors were not to be REM they weren't being utilized no they actually had a couple of spaces in front of it the the layout just wasn't well thought out and and then also on the

interior of the structure where there were these these on the old plans there these two fairly larged hatch no parking areas um we were able to reduce those slightly uh and again um squeeze some more spaces in there but but to Mr agar's Point um actually on the interior parking spaces along Fifth Street on the old plan um all of the they they had eight we have nine but they were all um

16 by9 we're actually have 17 by uh 17 by9 um yeah 17 by9 so they're actually a little bit larger um we were able to actually get better measurements we think on the interior of the building and showed that we had an extra two feet there beyond what what they showed on their plan and through site plan review Rick that they'll have to meet these numbers you know for dimensions and and

numbers so if if we get through site plan review and we go and inspect the interior of the building or you know get full design and they can't meet these requirements and they may need to come back you know before this board and when when the board looked at it the last time the fact that they couldn't provide one to one on site the board had asked for that increased ratio per bedroom

because they were relying on off-site locations uh because they just felt that they couldn't get to the one to one uh onsite thank you attorney and this creatively gets 27 avoids if we approve this ratio avoids off-site parking and and that that hassle that goes with it yeah we had the discussion last time you know when we look at this neighborhood where we have um Liberty Utilities across

Fifth Street and then served as bus station directly north of it uh after the hours of you know 3:00 4:00 these streets are fairly wide open and that that was part of the decision when the board what they considered when they were talking about the meril building and the avail avilability of on street parking once once business is closed for the day yeah yeah that was a very different

situation it's thankful that they they didn't go to the route of you know we don't want to provide any on Street spaces okay any other questions from the board comments nothing John Jim turning to the general public those on attendant anybody here wish to speak in favor of the development anyone wish to speak in opposition to the uh to the petition they hearing none and Dan thank you for the uh for the input on that

anything else no just I mean the entire project can be moved under 86 376 under a number of you know enumerated sections in that and as well as 86445 for the actual parking um which allows for the reduction in number and the reduction in size of aisles and space so no variance required no Varian no Varian is required WR and I think that's part of the problem the last time was if

they had proceeded the first time solely as a special permit I don't think they they put it in as being in an Arts overlay District on the initial submission um so they they wanted to move as a variance and that's why the one-year expiration if there was a special permit it still would have been valid yeah that's what through me I couldn't remember that it was a variance at the time until I went back and looked

at it because I couldn't because I know we changed to two years on special per it's not our job to tell them how to to the state standards yeah all right in that case I turn to the board for a uh there was nothing in the audience I know you asked but I didn't thank you though it's okay it keep me honest make a motion to Grant a special

permit does it have to be bated it does I'll make a motion that it is not more detrimental to the neighborhood okay do we have second second from Ricky yes okay very good on the motion Ricky s yes Danier yes Jim ckins yes John Frank yes chairman Prairie yes then a second and now I'll make the motion to approve the petition subject to site plan review and a one: one ratio for

parking just Mr chairman on that um I know the plan shows for those five spaces along the building um at 16 ft um we would suggest making that 17 feet with the drive aisle at 21 feet I don't know if you want to incorporate that in into the motion I I don't think it needs to be incorporated after you presented it that way but because on on the plan it actually says 17 foot spaces 21 foot

aisle so no no no it's 22 and 16 on the plan right no no but there's a notation on the plan where it says the relief that's requested says 21t aisles 17t spaces I think it's like in the top left hand corner okay I got um okay so I think it's just aera of that that number so are you engineers at a minimum of 17 ft spaces and 21 fet for the aisles good

catch that's my motion very good do we have a second on that motion second by Jim Caulkins on the motion John Frank yes Jim Caulkins yes Dan dear yes Ricky sah yes chairman Pera yes great thank you very much have a good night gentlemen you going to Somerset now I'm not thank I can actually go home celebrating Valentine's day one day late yeah it's half price on day bu cards today petition number

two uh Alexis elamo care of attorney uh McKenzie J long 159 Lawrence street map i22 lot 11 the applicant seeks a variance to convert the existing single family dwelling into a three- family dwelling with the ground ground level garage space being converted into two single bed Studio style Apartments per designed with the existing foot within the existing footprint waving dimensional and setback requirements in

the BL local business zoning District good evening good evening Mr chair good evening to the board uh for the record attorney McKenzie long here representing my client Alexis an Selmo um as Mr chair pointed out we are here to uh seek relief and a variance for the conversion of this single family dwelling um I do want to make a note you noted as 159 it is50 Lawrence Street um outside of that

everything was correct so we are seeking relief from both the dimensional requirements under chapter 86 section 35 as well as the side yard setback requirement um we do have an existing uh prior existing non-conforming it is 9 1/2 ft as you can see on the easterly portion of this building as opposed to the required 10 um outside of that we meet all other setbacks we do as you can

see have three parking spaces currently in front of the building and then a little bit further down lawen street to the West there is already a curb cut that exists um right now it's just dirt the applicant is um proposing that it be t or potentially added Stone there regardless um to add an additional three spaces so that we could meet the parking requirement of two spaces per dwelling

unit um the conversion would note that the existing space and the existing footprint of the building will not be changed um and the intent is to add two one-bedroom units on the first floor which is currently a garage it just has a rollup door in the front right now with a three-bedroom um apartment upstairs the um dimensional requirement here would require 8,000 square ft for the three family um but we have

7,074 ft so a little under 1,000 ft shy of the requirement um plenty of room as you can see for the parking uh off Street there is also a few um on street parking spaces out front that are utilized typically by uh the existing tenants um outside of that I believe the board is provided with um a architectural plan showing the uh interior design that was submitted I don't know that is awesome

perfect just to give you a taste of what the uh design intent is so how many square feet of the uh two studio apartments uh I believe they're just under 600 square fet a piece just curious bigger than the tiny house and smaller than bedrooms yes yes exactly kitchen living room combined in the front with a bedroom bathroom and to the rear um outside of that you know we are just requesting that the board Grant a

variance with the requested relief any questions from the board any questions we already have two curb Cuts so we don't even have to worry about that there are there's a second CB cut there concrete driveway there's a concrete drive right in front of the big garage door the fence probably has to go but that's for them to work out the intent is to remove the fence just for ease of entrance access the yeah right

now the fence makes it a little tight to get the three cars in the driveway so we will be taking the fence down I'd also like to note that the applicant does intend to live in one of the units okay there's got to be history behind this lot it's going to be left over from something that is one of the strangest we we looked into it you know it did get

relief and I don't even understand why it got reliefed the first time except for that it was existing non-conforming with regards to the sidey yard setback because it was just a garage that they converted the second floor which could have been done as a special permit for a pre-existing non-conforming structure but they apparently sought relief so what it comes down to is basically you know a

very minute area uh variance um of what did we say 500 square ft or th about 1,000 square foot difference um the pie shape is fairly irregular um it does sit on the corner of the street which is is what forces that that piie shape if it was not on a corner probably would have been more rectangular so I would say that there is some some uniqueness to the shape of the lot um

with regards to the lack of the area y it exceeds the frontage requirement so fairly odd for the district which only requires 50 ft of Frontage there are quite a few uh multifamilies in the area as well just to that yeah the the three family use is allowed in the BL District that's the cap um for what's allowed for a number of units so could this come in as a special permit

could it have yeah now no because it's it's an area yeah they need a waiver of the area requirement for this reforming to begin nonconforming with regards to setback not for you so area um and so currently now they could convert the first floor to one unit by by a matter of right so there's always the need for more affordable units the building was actually constructed by the applicant's

father really yeah in the early 90s business or yes I thought yeah she lived upstairs and they uh ran the business out the first floor if you look at it this way Jim if it if it had gone to a two two unit you would would have probably had three bedrooms downstairs too so this way you you got the two Studio units single bedroom units works out nicely any other questions from the board

comments I'm assuming no exterior Renovations except the windows right I'm sure they're going to have to and the bottom right now is uh brick like showing so we're going to cover that up get rid of the garage door yeah exactly add Windows might be nice be a little dark in there without the windows might be nice okay very good I turn to the general public is there anybody in attendance

that wishes to speak in favor of this petition anybody wishing to speak in opposition you're hearing none I turn to the board I have no further questions on it the board does not approval second all right approval uh motion to approve and a second no conditions shouldn't be really right that being the case on the uh on the motion Ricky Sahar yes danar yes Jim ckins yes John Frank yes chairman Prairie yes good luck

thank Jing

to right petition number three Joseph ganero care of Attorney Peter aino um my brain is going soft on me hang on a

second don't take a personal Peter I'm not a admiring the new table I love it significant upgrade know the rubber made table I'll miss it but this one's very nice all right again I apologize uh this is that one's tough and flip so be careful yeah where did this come from is diamond diamond probably built it I noticed it a week ago actually no you know where I think it came from remember

there used to be the table outside yeah if you look underneath those stairs they've closed that in and made closets with storage I saw that yeah so I think that might be that might be where that table came from but I'm impressed anyway this is 267 Gratton uh graten street map E18 lot 11 the applicant seeks a variance to subdivide property into two buildable lots and construct a single family drawing on

each lot according to plans waving uh lot area Frontage and side yard setbacks and an R8 single family zoning District good evening members of the board my name is Peter Felino I represent the applicant petitioner with me is my client did you say your name for the record uh Joe of gadero Mr gardano uh owns the lot at 267 Gratton Street The Proposal before the board as Mr chair read is to divide the existing lot into

two lots such that two single family homes could be constructed uh the waivers sought are area Frontage and side setback in the R8 District um in terms of my hardship argument if I don't know if anybody in the words of David assada is not any independent research but I went out to this site and it significantly slopes to the east um so if you're standing in the street looking at the lot to the left there's a

significant downward slope so I think our best hardship argument here is the Topography of the lot and uh the justification for that is given how low the easterly side of the lot is and if you notice the retaining wall on the Westerly side of the lot I think it's only feasible to reconstruct a dwelling if there are two um ultimately here there was a house that burned down uh leaving us with this vacant lot that the

cost of fill and other things make it um untenable and so as a result I've called out in my petition that I think the hardships the topography I've called the board's attention to the fact that uh not withstanding the fact that we're asking for these variances area wise and Frontage wise that the size of the Lots as proposed is still consistent with the neighborhood I called out 339 Rod 278

Gratton 248 Gratton and 306 Gratton as uh being depicted on Mr Gio's plan and comparable in size and scope to the proposed Lots so I'm happy to field any questions uh from the board but that is our proposal that is the hardship argument and um we can rest on that I uh I agree with you on the hardship I am I was surprised at how much that that slopes um probably get what six feet

from one side to the other I would say at least I I think it's 809 89 yeah Mr chair I think something to think about um and you can't tell by this plant or by the aerial but if you went back and looked at historic Aerials the existing house that was there was pushed off way to the high side because of you know trying to contend with utilizing the entire area was not feasible because of

the elevation difference are your neighbors especially those on the downhill side obviously they're aware of this they would have been notified so um we just have to go to site plan because yeah obviously concerned about drainage Etc right hand that all right I think it's I think it's a reasonable use any other questions from the board at this time two off street parking per right yes Mr Frank

and that'll just be a short driveway no garage right oh yeah it's a garage one has a garage one proposes a garage but yeah both have uh 20 foot driveways for off Street part okay let's turn to the audience anyone here wishing to speak in support of the petition anyone wishing to speak in opposition yes please okay Bunch we start over here and if you please identify yourself with

your address my name is Juliet Jasmine I live at 208 Frost Street I am in a and um again the board has always very supportive of the neighborhood association and um my late husband and myself work very hard to keep the neighborhood the way it is not to kind of put houses on postage stairs we fought last year for one on the corner of Renard and Granton and Through the Years a few more on grah

street and the board always supported us is just to make money it's not conforming to the neighborhood because it's all single family homes not and I don't think it should be I really don't you know I'm I'm 80 years old I've been coming down here for almost 50 years to try to save our neighborhood and then you get these Builders or people that buy these Lots they don't live in the

neighborhood but they're willing to put up houses on postage STS it's a big piece of property but the people that live there lived there for many a years and that's all I have to say okay I appreciate that thank you any wanted to speak also hi my name is Robin she and I live at 350 cross street okay so I'm against this the hardship is the land I guess the man can

put one house on there the um the frontage is going almost half the size of the R8 zoning should be um I think it's 80 80 feet and he wants to do 50 feet so he's just taking advantage of this he can build one house so why is it a h ship and I don't actually remember that was there just abandoned and knock down I don't know what happened to

it so why why not tell theuth about yes the not being but to put a frontage 50 ft when it should be 80 ft that's size he is able to one house on that property and there was one house on that property I don't understand the hardship okay I I will point out that there are other lots that are under sized as far as fron there's actually some that are less than

the 50 ft there are there are but they're they've been existing for years and you know if I would have I just found out about this meeting when I was at work today but um some of those houses have been there forever there are houses that were built in 1900 that are on small Lots but that's over 100 years ago you know so um it's just it's just going to take away my property value in

the neighbor's property values and we we do we we come here all the time for this it's it's all about greed and and opportunity you know at our expense and at the city's expense in the long run you know so but it's not a hardship thank you for the input yeah hi I'm oldow I live at 306 Grant Street like right diagonally from the yes that house wasn't burned it was

knocked down a couple had bought it down the street from us they broke up they sold the property that's how what happened they was knock down yes it's going to affect my value of my house for two houses okay there's going to be parking parking where people going to park yeah they have a parking lot but when they have family coming over and all that where are they going to park

you don't going go one way or the other way to SES Park have cars parked there I don't want to see this I don't want to be watching for people up and down and I have little kids grandkids that I take here all week do I have to watch for all this going on no that not big enough for two and be comfortable let's keep Maplewood the way it is extend one house I'm I'm good with

thank you okay thank you anyone else hi I'm Elizabeth 339 rard Street and you're right my lot might be small that house is built in 1930 I'm on the corner rard and Granton houses sorry putting two houses there is going to encroach on everybody else why do we need it's going to take away from the the big yards we all have and like said the parking they might have parking parking space but you can't

park on both side of the road on that street they're going to park with in front of her driveway in front of her driveway I mean it's it's not feasible to do that and again like said also they come from some place else to build a house there sell it and and go they're not living there with us in the neighborhood and I'm opposed to this I mean I don't and it's going to probably

stoping then then put a a big 8ot fence so I want to see that I really don't agree with happen two houses there okay thank you anyone

else again questions from the board any any response attorney still yeah I mean my responses are probably similar to responses I've made in the past we're certainly here at the zoning board because it doesn't comply with zoning we understand what we could build by right it doesn't make sense for my client to build one house um I've made what I think is a decent argument under 40a not what people want to see but what

standard this board has to make a finding of which is hardship relating to soil shape or topography I didn't talk about shape because the shape's perfect okay um but I certainly did talk about topography I've been out there and I think that is a cogent legal argument that supports this petition not withstanding the fact that the neighborhood uh maybe it's an unpopular proposal in the neighborhood um but

there's no question that we've provided parking as is consistent with other projects in the city there's no question that my client doesn't live in the neighborhood and there's no question he's asking for Relief notwithstanding what's been said we think the relief is reasonable appropriate and consistent with the neighborhood and we don't think that we're eroding people's yards or property values but in fact probably

raising value given the fact that this is new construction which is beneficial to the neighborhood and beneficial to the city uh in the long run from a tax-based perspective again notwithstanding the arguments made by a Butters you know again area area Frontage and side yard is speak I I will as soon as I finish thank you um area Frontage sidey yard we seem to do it a lot but it's still three variances basically I no

question no question no question about it which is a lot um I'm going for I'm sorry who else wanted to speak again yes ma'am when um when he bought the lot he knew it was whatever you call it to you know the way the land went so why did he buy it you know there was one house there for many a years I've been where I I live for 53 years I I

understand as a an owner of the land he has not done anything to clean that land we've had to look at that grass not being cut piles of dirt in the yard the fences all broken down so he has no pride in hour neighborhood but he's willing to buy to build two houses so that he can make a profit on it and we got to live there for the rest of our

lives I bought in the Maplewood area because I like the Maplewood area it's like the Highland you don't see houses like that up the highlands you need to take a drive through the highlands the Maplewood area is one of the nicest neighborhoods and safest neighborhoods in the in the in the city we've been told that by the police that come to our meetings agreed and that's all I have to say okay thank

you thank you anything else from the board gentlemen I'm going to turn to the board for you've already weighed in I have nothing else comments before we um before we seek a uh motion

referred both sides gentlemen we can move to a motion actually we have to move to a motion it's our job what are you thinking

Dan the uh consistency with the other there's five other four of the Lots in the same street right across the street and a buing there smaller or the same size um with that I'll make a motion to Grant is there a second on that do we have conditions yeah plan for the plan as for the plan two off street parking site plan oh asraw and site plan rev is there a second on that second second from

R then on the motion Ricky sahti yes Dan de yes Jim ckins no John Frank J per no denied requires a super majority so thank you thank

you uh see petition number four Rodman Enterprises LLC 771 Rodman Street lot i22 I'm sorry map i22 to lot 15 the applicant seeks a variance to demolish the existing garage at 771 Rodman Street and construct four townhouse style apartment buildings consisting of a total of 14 units uh two four unit buildings and two three unit buildings as per plan waving yard setback not coverage in an A2 apartment zoning

District uh good evening for the record my name is Jeff Tolman from Northeast engineers and Consultants here representing Rodman Enterprises LLC uh the applicant for the petition uh that's before you tonight um 7 771 Rodman Street is located on the south side of Rodman Street um it has 100 ft of Frontage on Rodman Street itself um it does wrap around and also has 172 feet or just over 172 ft on holy O Street and

an additional 155 ft of Frontage on Salem Street uh which is an unimproved unapproved unimproved right away um the property is located in the apartment 2 A2 zoning District uh there are currently two commercial garages on the property um number 771 is a 6,400 ft auto repair facility uh which is located towards the front of the property on Rodman Street and um there's also a second garage

approximately 3500 Square ft uh located on the west side of the property adjacent to Holy Oak Street um that that garage it's my understanding is currently leased by the city of Fall River um that lease is coming um or will be expiring at some point towards the end of this year um as you it's tough to pick out on this plan but as you can see there is a 12 foot encroachment on the main garage the

7 uh 771 Rodman Street Garage into the RightWay on on Salem Street uh and there's also existing asphalt um that comes from in front of that garage that extends um to the east as well into the uh the RightWay of Salem um some of that asphalt is being used by um the auto repair facility and some of it um is being used for parking on the abing property um to the

east uh the uses that that the property current currently has and the structures themselves both uh pre-existent non-conforming uh the lot itself is conforming uh does have the minimum minimum Frontage and area required for a lot in the A2 zoning District um The Proposal that we have before you tonight is to uh basically demolish the two existing garages and to construct uh four townhouse style buildings uh

containing 14 units total uh the two of the buildings would be three unit uh buildings and two of them would would have four units um as you can see the hardship that we're up against here is quite clearly the shape of this lot uh it's one of the most regular-shaped Lots I've seen in the city it's basically L-shaped it comes to a pinch point in the middle um but other than that it has

sufficient area uh and Frontage um for Lots in the uh again in the apartment uh two zoning District the the one stipulation that we have on this plan with the layout that we do have is it does require that Salem Street be abandoned um we are showing two of the buildings with slight encroachments into that uh right away uh we are proposing to petition the city to have that um I I

know paperwork has been I I don't believe anything's been filed as of yet but I know um the applicant does have an attorney working on that in preparing the necessary documents to petition the city for that abandonment so this request that's before you tonight is uh predicated on that abandonment okay so let me ask even before you finish my understanding is this is not a city Street Salem Street is not a city street

I'll turn to I'll turn to the engineering department at this point director of engineering correct it it's an an unaccepted paper Street that's shown up on a subdivision plan when this area was laid out so considered private or paper similar to Duro on Chase when they wanted to put par in that um and impede on other people's rights and we'll give another little history lesson of when it is a city street the city has

the rights to abandon it when it's not a city street everyone who has afforded rights to that way which could be an abutter could be someone else on that subdivision plan have rights to Salem Street so the property to the east I 2216 by Costa yeah I don't see the building or what the use is of that building but I think on the area it looks like some type of multif family

home correct um the cost is have legal rights to all of Salem Street if they wanted to petition to construct Salem Street in its entirety they have every right to do so um the fact that the existing structure Falls within Salem Street um the Costas um and any other entity that has rights to Salem Street um could require that that existing building be removed as it's impeding their access and rights in in Salem

Street so I I don't want to get too deep into that um I just want to answer that question to you um just for that just that one specific item with the city cannot all the city can eliminate its rights to the private way for use and utilities but it cannot abandon it because it does not own it so that that makes it a land Court issue yeah not a

city of Fall River issue and you would need everyone that has rights yeah I believe there are two two um parties that have rights there it would be the applicant and it would be the costers next door um so certainly we would have to get them on board with that abandonment um and then at that point everybody would own up to the center line if they do agree with part of what

we're proposing and I had submitted um a couple of plans uh Nina if you can just uh call up the proposed condition plan there there you go so it's it's not labeled but on the side of the Costa house what we'd be doing is constructing a driveway um for them of 16t in width uh up along their sidewalk that would provide the off street parking um that they would be losing or missing um I

don't know how they use it now there's only a small portion of that pavement that extends on their side but I do know uh that some of the tenants in that uh I believe it's a three Family House do um use it for parking so we'd want to compensate that and and provide them um with uh some means of off street parking as well has that even been presented to

them yet no okay then I think we're out of I think we're out of sequence here I I can't I personally and I will say this to my board and they can do what they want with it I can't give relief on something that you don't have clear access to at this point okay all right I I just think it's it's it's out of line it it we could we could Grant it and it

may end up meaning nothing correct and you've got to push back up onto the property shrink something get off of what is now Salem Street uh and be back in front of us the second time I I just think it's it's out of order and if I'm not mistaken it's Salem Street on the opposite side as well with the construction though yeah the other side of whoever developed that may actually have some right here

so Mr chairman it's again it's a land Court issue let's not take chances with it you got an attorney working on it m I say once you've once you've hammered it out in land Court once you've hammered it out with with the ab budding property owner the Costas then I think then is the time to come back in with the application that item aside Mr chairman I I would I would request that that the

board discuss the merits of unit count parking um things of that nature to give the applicant some guidance because I I think it would be fair to give the applicant the opportunity potentially to table this maybe modify this layout um maybe even reduce some Street setbacks maybe reduce the setbacks between the proposed buildings and only provide the amount of parking that's absolutely required which

would be 28 spaces which I think you're providing much much more than that now yes 34 you may be able to get rid of the entire 11 space Bay um and pull both of those buildings further Northwest and eliminate the need to get into Salem Street with whatever the setback would be to Salem Street um I think it's I think it's overall a good project it's getting rid of a super non-conforming

use oh yeah to the neighborhood um so I I wouldn't want us to be bogged down on the Salem Street issue if the applicant can potentially reconfigure what's here um and come back to us with a different layout that does not contemplate the abandonment of Salem Street and that may address I know we have some of Butters here I don't know if they're the costers or not but um that may eliminate their

concerns as well and and listen there's no question in the quality of the development that your client puts together he's added some fantastic developments to the city to to them to the to the advantage of of the city of Fall River this street situation the Salem Street situation is what's bugging me so je have similar to this the Duro apartment building on globe that was permitted for 400 units M they had wanted to

discontinue Ash and Center correct both private ways okay and a number of those abutters came in in opposition so the Law Department had looked into how do you abandon if if the if was a if Salem streo ran through the property and your developer owned both sides of it I think it's a different story um but I don't think the board can approve something that may or may not impede upon or Advance you know impeding on

someone's rights unless that was resolved first exactly so what we're looking for what we were asking for for for setbacks here is we're basically going down to 15 feet on along Rodman Street 15 feet along Holy Oak Street 15 feet to the rear uh with the abutters that are on TOA Street and you know various different setbacks on Salem having looked at this tonight if we could reduce like Holio street is

it's being used it's not like Salem Street on this side here it is being used by the um I think there's a Transportation uh company that across they do use it um but it it's really it goes it goes to the back of the properties on tumpa street to the extent where somebody one of the homeowners there on tumpa has a driveway that comes in that way and they they Park um in the

rear of their property having said that that street does not get a lot of uh traffic com going up and down it if we could reduce that setback from 15 to 10 if the board would um you know be willing to entertain that we could shift these buildings over and probably reconfigure this to get uh the building uh um out of the right away because right now we're proposing it there's a 5

foot encroachment U if nothing changes so obviously we can't build that um but we might be able to um to modify uh the plan in that manner I mean right now the building on hoc is on the street line so you'd be improving correct any any set back there correct yes I think there's I think there's many things that can be modified in this to get them out of

Salem Street yeah I I I you know again I I see Merit in I think it's pretty creative use of a pretty weird lot right so no and we had kicked around believe me there were probably about probably about four or five different versions of plans that we played around with on this property to try to come up with something um and the applicant wanted to push forward with this one um

we we can certainly go back to the drawing board probably make some minor changes um and end up with the you know 14 units and the required off street parking uh the one of the other things I looked at too is uh one of the Bays maybe where we have the 12 uh if we did away with the perpendicular parking did some parallel parking there uh because we could lose six spaces and still meet

the the you know the two spots per unit ratio um we can and then we could push that parking lot a little bit closer to the other properties um to get further away from Salem Street and I think at that point we could maintain uh uh more well we we'd actually have a set back to same street as opposed to being in it right so and and if you have if you can perfect the abandonment

M you know yeah it you're fine but that land Court can take forever right oh yeah which is you know a problem so if this is redrafted you don't need Salem Street you can probably save some bucks with the abandonment that's entirely up to your client um not chase the abandonment not not not around with landan court and still come in with something and you know I I agree with with Dan let's get

some input from the board here how do you feel about the general idea of this I'm suggesting strongly that we do not try to vote on this them tonight I I'm just hesitant to design property for somebody else yeah I'm I'm comfortable with making a motion to table if that's what they looking to do yeah but um I think we have some people in the audience I was still going to the audience

yeah I think I think you've got a sound design I think it just needs it needs to be tweets some tweets yes that said is there anyone here to speak in favor of the petition is anyone to here to speak in opposition because I'm abusing my paring spaces yeah that I I just need a name and address my name I live at 791 Street okay the the parking on Salem Street

which he's like referring to is where we've been parking the tenants at 791 rman street that piece of property she's the one that has the grass cut there had trees cut down nobody's ever done anything with that all right what hang on which piece of property if you go Street you go to the existing conditions plan the presentation and like myter my son over there too we're not going to give

that well and if you've filed for adverse possession or imminent domain that's cool but if you haven't I think they did years which was my grandfather and the original owners of that garage which was tommyc okay this is not a court of law I wish because I want to wear a robe up here so bad you go home wear I have but no seriously if if imminent domain was filed and perfected there'd be

something on the title that it would exist it would be in the land Court there again landan court is the place to go because it is private if you have rights to park on it that's cool otherwise if you don't you don't and it's just convenient and it's been there and I'm not trying to say it one way or the other so if you think adverse possession was filed there's got to be a document

someplace so you can't just come in and say I'm not going to lose it I'm not going to give it up if you don't have a right to it and again this is not a court of law but but just be careful because if you think you've got it prove it and then that takes away the whole abandonment of saale and Street situation saying that is because when Mr went to build that last part of the

garage right I guess he came down here and he said that because nobody could Builds on that section because it goes all the way it's all ledge going all the way up that hill and because he was building there they told him that half of that street was my parents and the other half was his and it was because of eminent domain that's what he was told down it's got to

be a document that's all I'm going to say I'm not so I can explain again a little bit so on private ways the abing land owners own to the center line of the way so half and half the way they that's ownership however rights to pass repass and and construct are through the entire way ownership and and rights are two different things but we I think we're going to get that item resolved my

question is are are either one of you the owners of that property and what's your name Patricia Costa Patricia Costa okay and Nina I'm I'm noticing that they're not listed on the abutters list which they should have been so I'm glad that you're here here but did did you receive a letter in the mail yes I I sent a letter though I'm looking at the list and I don't do you hold it under a trust of

some sort I just don't see unless is it i22 lot 16 yes I don't see that listed I I sent it though you got you got it in the mail I know but right did we add one what's the what is the mailing on the ACT you have the envelope street right but what is the what is the name that you have the envelope or no no but it came in her

name all right I'm just trying to figure out how you got it unless we picked up on this before there was an ERA on the abuts list and Nina has the corrected so this isn't this isn't the the application I mean I usually check it myself yeah and go through to make sure that I'm not miss well in any event you were notified so I'm glad that that's the case but I didn't receive an update

a Butters list or anything so that what's there is what was given from the assessor's office because one time um that's they used to park all their trucks there yeah their trucks and he he went to parking my drive RightWay and I said you can't talk there he goes why not I said that's private property and this is what I'm talking he came down here and he looked into it and they said

they told him that I had four parking spaces so who we T to at that time I do not know we're going to try and resolve that as part of this and and you can see on that existing conditions when that dash line is is the center line that that m is referring to um where the ownership between the two parties on either side would own up to it's not

ownership as as Mr agas pointed out it would be it would be rights to it but not necessarily ownership and that's what needs to get squared away well think the the rights I think it isn't it ownership isn't that what you said and then the rights would be to enti lay but ownership would be to Center Line and own ownership is to the center line yeah can't impede their way no you can't you

can't block right you can't block their their right to pass and repass so um we can we can modify the plan and and I think square away the uh the issues with showing the proposed encroachments into that area um now fully understanding the um legal part of you know what's going on with Salem Street there I thought it was just going to be a discontinuance but it seems as though

that's not the case so um I I vote for a continu he's got to ask for it yeah I know this would you know how long is it going to take I think that's the point you'd go back redraft would you want two months to put everything together seem looked at a lot of he he can get this back in for next month yeah I mean I would um again because my

my plan at this point would be do away with any proposals improvements in Salem Street pull everything out um we might be close up to the line but we're not going to be blocking any uh you know WR the pass or repass with anything that will it's going to be better than an encroachment right that currently exists yeah so we can just for for the abutters here we're not we're not touching Salem Street

and he's going back to redraft this so it's not in Salem Street so your situation on that that half of of Salem Street Remains the Same that would have remained the same anyway right but the question becomes the abandonment of the street it's not a public way it's it's it's private right soine everything stays status quo for you and unless somebody comes along probably notified through the land Court

asking about abandoning the right of way that still doesn't change your rights that's that's still your your half there to the the southern half of of Salem Street and and quite simply just looking at this plan here what I probably just thinking off the top of my head we're we're going to be taking down the garage that encroaches into Salem Street now that's going to go away we're not going

to have have any new uh proposed structures in Salem Street we can leave the the pavement that's adjacent to Rodman Street in Salem Street for the for the abd's use um really serves no purpose to us um obviously it's a huge benefit to them so you know we're not going to propose to remove any of that even like the section that's on on half we'll just keep it as is um I'm not sure

if that where the access point uh for that is if it's it looks as though it would it is in the right away just look at how the cars are parked in front of the the garage so yeah I mean we'll just s cut it get rid of the pavement you know in front of the building on our property and uh keep that driveway there for the ab's use and please either

through you your office or whoever is Counsel on this please stay in touch with with your the abiding property owner sure and probably check in with the the other property owner that is at the end of the street too I don't don't think they have a driveway going through normally normally you don't have rights to the butt end of a street but that's not every case but you've got the same thing right now on

um you do have somebody doing kind of the same thing but then again hoio street is the city street it is constructed it's constructed it has I don't know I don't know if it's an accepted way I don't know because we weren't dealing with that it has a full right of way it has a full right away it seems to be being utilized for Access yeah and you do have

somebody that has a driveway cut in at the end of that correct I think it's the Murphy property yeah and in this one you'd be hot pressed just with the grade change going from Rodman Street up to the property on on the comire um so yeah I mean I can I can say for certain sitting here tonight that we The Proposal coming back is going to be to shortcut that payment leave that as is

everything in Salem Street all that payment leave it as is for their benefit to use um it it serves no purpose to our proposed development so and obviously it's a huge benefit to them so you asking for a continuance continuance correct you want to come back March 21st or April 18th March 21st yeah you have a request for a continuance thank you for showing up we appreciate so thank you for showing

up that's what it's about you got to speak up to your rights right when you're losing something you're going to show up right well I mean you know what no matter what you wouldn't have lost it it's just a question of you know what's the status of that Landa right now it's a it's a private non-accepted Street and the rest of that isn't that commercial property what do you mean the rest of it

where all those garages is it that commercial it's commercially used it's residentially zoned yeah yeah it's a residential Zone and a commercial use so it's a non-conforming use in the zone right now and we will Reen notify you so for the 21st meeting can we have a motion on the request for continuance motion to Grant motion from Dan we have a second second on the motion John Frank yes Tim ckins

yes Dan yes Ricky sah yes great thank you thank you Jeff make sure you get Nina your tabling fee okay yeah I don't want her hunting you down I would never submit it at the last minut I know I'll I'll let you know exactly how much it is okay good item number five election of

offic you could hold them hostage no good after one of them still good no one of them's still good we're going to change thanks jeffk back all right let Hammer us out election election of officers care chair Vice chair clerk Treasurer sergeant of arms we're going to expand it everybody gets a title I want to be treasur new chair if no one wants any changes someone can just make a motion to keep the same slate second

no can't I can't maintain no okay my term expired before then oh whoopsie when did your term expired what do you telling me have we already talked to the mayor so you can stay do don't want any the city council off just sent out emails about ones that were about to expire so I don't know when is it all you going to do is looks send an email April April 17th you keep

it the same and if for some reason you don't get reappointed then we'll we'll handle it that way let's expect it it's not until April April 17th April 17 we can do that we can do what Dan said yeah you don't have to accept the nomination you just have to vote what was my exp and you'll be out voted next she is meeting I'm done that's so there's a um there's a motion

to keep everything the way it is an a second yes okay in that case thank you I hate you and on the motion Ricky yes Dan yes Jim yes you can vote yeah you're still on the board no I'm still here you have to know did you vote now we got John chairman prair yes you're stuck with it if you walk out of here can you follow up with that tomorrow to see uh I'm

gonna talk to the get that on the agenda yeah Nina what does the March look like bu oh well I may be in Florida that's why I'm asking somebody that left might be in Florida I might be I'm not sure I'm not sure I might be inida because it's got be one what's the next item on the agenda yeah please we still approval of minutes citizens input none approval of minutes I move acceptance of the minutes

or waiting reading of minutes acceptance seconds and a second all in favor I uh adjournment motion to adjourn I love second all in favor I I thank you all very much