Zoning Board of Appeals 6 26 25

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, June 26, 2025.

We are meeting at one government center in the first floor meeting room.

Pursuant 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. Michael Ferrer, with both a video and audio version. If anybody here wishes to make a video, audio or combination recording of this meeting, please inform me now so that I can make a public announcement.

They're seeing none.

Sorry about that. Our recording secretary for this evening is Miss Patty Aguiar who is sitting to my immediate right. Uh present this evening are myself as chair, Mr. John Frank our co-chair, uh James Caulkins, our clerk, Dan Dupier, um and regular member Ricky Sahadi as well. Uh we also have one alternate with us tonight, um Ms. Alexis Ansamo.

Also sitting in tonight is the director of engineering and planning, Mr. Dan Aguar, sitting to my far left. 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 Chapter 4A as amended.

Yes. I declare the June 26, 2025 regularly scheduled meeting of the zoning board of appeals of the city of Fall River open for such business as shall come before it.

I remind all persons presenting before the board including the petitioners of butters anyone in support or anyone in opposition to a petition that your presentation should be limited to three minutes. Questions and responses should be must be directed through the chair.

The board's rules and regulations direct the board to specifically look for information which support the petitioner's claims. As such, the petitioners should identify and factually support the basis for the petition. I hereby advise the petitioners and all interested parties that this is the zoning board of appeals. The board's authority exists pursuant to Mass General Law Chapter 4A

and is limited in scope and deals with the use of land as regulated by chap uh chapter 86 of the ordinances of the city of Fall River. Additional petition permits licenses reviews and/or approvals may be required for the specific development, which is the subject of your petition before the zoning board this evening.

The action taken by the board has a real and lasting effect upon the title to your uh your real estate. I urge all petitioners to seek competent legal advice before filing your petitions and after a decision has been made. a copy of the ordinance is available in a city clerk's office or from the planning department. I urge you that the online version of the bylaw should not be referred to for applications. 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 River zoning ordinance. The city charter chapter uh 9-18 mandates that all multimember bodies develop and adopt rules or policy 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 this meeting.

There is a sign up sheet outside the uh the door on the table if you're interested in speaking tonight. I declare um nope don't need to declare that. I declare the meeting open.

You declare uh with the permission of under old business with the permission of petitioners 01 and 03 uh which is uh Carol Okonnell in the case of 01 and Brad Turner in the case of O2. I'd like to go out of order and take item uh number 03 and 04 before you. Mr. Thank you, council. That is fine with Mr. Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much.

Therefore, beginning with old business, item number 03, the applicant is Rock View LLC, care of attorney Peter Aselino, 55570 Rock Street, Map 02, lot 16 and 17. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the following. One to convert the existing convent and carriage house on lot 16 and 17 into 15 residential apartments waving the requirements of the '04 zoning district as detailed in section 86-35

attachment 1 and section 86-36 attachment two of the city of Fall River zoning bylaw. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following uh pursuant to section 86445 to adjust the dimensional requirements necessary to accommodate the required parking spaces and finally pursuent to 86321 to increase the existing non-conforming lot coverage for each lot. Property is located in an R4 two family zoning

district. This was tabled at our May 15, 2025 meeting. Council. Thank you. For the record, my name is Peter Selenino.

I'm a lawyer with offices at 550 Lucas Street. I represent the applicant petitioner, Rock View LLC. I am making a motion to table the instant petition to the July meeting. My client is still working with his architect to see how and if he could reconfigure the unit count. And that for those reasons, uh, he's paid the tableing fee and I'm here to ask to table the petition. Okay. Very good.

Mr. Chairman, I move that we the request to table and fill our joy meeting.

Second motion and second on the um petition to table. Uh on the motion, Ricky, yes. Dan, yes. Jim, yes. John, yes. And Chairman Pere, yes. To those of you who came here this evening regarding this petition, you will not receive another notice. This is a table. So our next meeting is what's the date in July?

17.

Call it 17. 17. 17. Y. So we we will reconvene then on this matter on the 17th. It'll probably be at the top of the agenda because it's the first item table this evening. So thank you. Very good. Thank you council.

Item number 04. The applicant is High Development LLC care of attorney Thomas Picuran.

This is 0 and7 Slate Street, map H17, lot 27 and a portion of lot 2. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following. One to construct 72 residential units consisting of six multi-family buildings each with 12 units in a CMD district to 86 death, 36 Attachment two two to construct parking which is not located.

Can we have quiet in the hallway please?

No it's not it's no longer in the hallway. It's inside my chamber. Um, two, to construct parking which is not located within a structure to be located within 10 ft of the lot pursuant to section 86-444 uh B1 and 86-445 to eliminate the requirement of one loading space for each multif family dwelling consisting more than 10 units to 86441 and 86455.

The property is located within a CMD commercial mill district zoning district. The petition was previously heard on uh May 15th and table till tonight. Council, good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board. For the record, attorney Thomas Kellor offices at 350 North Main Street in Corville, Massachusetts. Uh we're requesting uh permission from the board to withdraw the petition. We've actually filed a a new and revised petition uh that's scheduled to be heard by the board at their July hearing. Um, but this petition that was filed uh and heard last month, we're asking to withdraw

without prejudice. Without prejudice.

We have a motion on the Mr. Chairman, I move that we uh grant permission to withdraw.

Second. Motion made in the second to withdraw without prejudice on the motion. John, yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes.

Ricky, yes. And Chairman Prairie, yes.

to everyone who may be here this evening in regard to this petition. It will be renoticed because it is a new petition that has been filed. So if you were here on the Slate Street uh issue, new notices will go out. Any question regarding the notices again as we said last time we were here have to be addressed through the assessor's office as far as who get notified and why they did as Mr.

Chairman, I believe so the notices went out today for the next hearing and I do believe that Mr. Kavalo here there was a change on the voters. There was a change for the the association that the mailing address is now to Mr.

Kavalo not to the group that was I think it was a manager company somewhere in the cape. So in the association will now be getting notified through Mr. Kavalo.

They made that change in the assessor's office. Very good. Thank you. Thank you very much. Have a good evening every Thank you too.

Back to the top of the batting order.

Under old business, night item number 01, the applicant is Kyro Okana.

Okonnell, I'm sorry. Carol attorney Jeffrey P. Medeiros uh 180, also known as 284 River Street, map X1, lot 16. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following. One, operating a seasonal bar, entertainment, event space, serving alcohol, and providing food via food trucks and licensed vendors. The proposed use would be in addition to the existing commercial boat uh boatyard

storage facility. The property is located within the CMD commercial mill zoning district. Uh this is item was tabled from our April 17, 2025 meeting who's sitting in you weren't here in April, correct? No, I wasn't here. You weren't. So So because of the This is substantially different. So Uh Alexis was here. You'll be voting on this one. Obviously, Ricky, you can still ask questions on any of the

petitions. Uh your input is welcome.

Can't vote on just because we covered a lot of the ground already. Thank you for that. That's why you have council.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Jeffrey Medeiros.

I'm an attorney here in the city of River with the law firm of Burke Espanol and Dan Coen. Um the uh petition before you was brought up in April. There were um several questions that the board wanted addressed before um we moved on the petition. Uh we did go back and we met with um the building inspector. We questioned him again as to um the uh concept what was going on. uh he did

inform us that it was a special permit under the the zoning ordinance um because it didn't meet the qualifications of what could be uh done in the CMD district. Uh so looking to the appendix uh it would be under uh appendix two I guess the second page under section E uh which would be by special permit as a bar. Um we did correct the address issue with Mr. um Aguar and engineering in the assessor's

office and that is now cleared up. Uh the um the uh the lot never changed X01 lot 16. It's still the same one from the original plan. That just had to be uh revised. Uh there was also a question about parkings. uh overflow parking as well as where the um the bar space was going to be. As we explained, uh the plan was kind of rushed so we could uh beat the

season, but there was boats there. So when Mr. Mr. Tolman, who is also here this evening, the engineer. Um, it was basically a representation as where we thought it was going to be, but now this is the actual area on the plan since so many boats or all the boats are now in the water.

We met with the um police department, the fire department, and also emergency medical services. And I think you will all find letters that are um in the that was sent to Mr. Aguia.

Okay. So, talk to us about the the new plan. And so, with regard to the new plan, um, Miss Okonnell would like to address that.

Good evening, board. Thank you again for your time. It's greatly appreciated. So, with the plan that's before you, we have shrunken the size of the existing property. We have reduced the number of people from 200 to 150 which would be 38 required parking spots and as you can see from the plan and you can read with permanent parking spots and spillover that we have 189 parking spots. We have

loading. We have handicap accessible.

And we now show the location of a food truck that would be within that square footage, not off to the side in the 16 by 20 bar space area. Um, after meeting with the building inspector, he would like to see granite blocking surrounding any open space. So, we include the granite blocking. Um, he preferred one entrance and one exit that would be clearly marked. And you can see we have

the proposed one entrance and exit area.

Um the as far as the food truck container, it would be one food truck that would be there and another local business here in the city that's operated for many years requested a meeting with us and we did meet with them. So Blunt Seafood uh was a great meeting. They said that they've been watching development in the city and were extremely excited to think that something could be literally in

their backyard in the north end. And so we met with them and if anybody's been to their location in Warren, they would put one of their scale down food trucks that goes to the Big E and other places fully licensed, self-contained, licensed by the state of Massachusetts and they are looking for us to give them a minimum of a year at least to put the food truck there seasonally with us. Um,

and again, we're two businesses been in the north end operating. We hit actually over a hundred years as a as owning the property and operating as a business business. Well, Seafood rivals us.

They're down on to fourth generation now where we're on third generation.

And we've combined we think that, you know, I have pictures for those of you that had didn't make it down recently to see what it looks like in the summertime and it's a vacant field. I think it'd be great economic development for the north end, giving the people of the north end a little something. Access to the water, watching the sunset that is really only accessible when it costs President A and

head to the south end.

I think we hit the benchmarks. I met with Mr. Aguar and the building inspector, walked the property with the fire department, walked the property with the police department, EMS came down. Um, the signs to come and go, as we mentioned at the last meeting, would be on Colin Street. And there are no houses. There are no residents on Colin Street. The only resident they would pass coming in, it would actually be my

own house.

I think, you know, we've really tightened everything up. We did meet with um the opposing factor. We tightened up the address with Mr. Aar. confusion about what was 180 because initially people thought it was going to be at 284 which was a residential existence that it's not going to be at. It is going to be as you can see plenty of land.

Just thought it would be a great thing to obviously a keep my employees working through the summer. It's difficult when you're a boatyard in the summer all the boats are gone. So we struggle to keep everybody working so we don't have to cut people loose in the summer. You know, increase the amount of people we would hire, provide new jobs in the city, and be a great use for what is

basically an empty field all summer on the water. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.

I will say my own opinion by moving it to that northerly direction on the lot and I think you've turned it as well the orientation of it you've probably ended up with a far better setup than you have before. So that looks good. We asked this question last time. Um during a a normal say a weekend um voters how many people actually keep their boats here? I know you have a ton

of mor. You don't have morings, do you?

I don't have any moings. No sl. Um, we I don't So I don't have transient dockage at all. So my I don't offer people coming and going. So I have we're a boatyard or a working boatyard. Yeah.

I'm not, you know, you're not a marine.

I'm not a marine. I'm working boatyard.

So, where you might come down and drive through and see that we have I'd have to count because sometimes we move floats around, but I rent out approximately 15 seasonal slips. They're permanent people. They have 16 permanent slips.

And Mr. Tolman did address that parking over by the office for those slips. And then I have full-time mechanics. So, boats come by water to get repairs done and then they leave. They, you know, that was my primary question. regarding how many people are in there for their boats on a on a typical week typical weekend when you would probably be open.

Yeah, you know, everybody's some guys come in the morning and go fishing. If you walk I have probably nine of those are fishing guys. So, they're coming in in the morning at like 4 in the morning and they're back by 10:00. We have a few people that do live on the board and spend a lot, you know, the weekends on it, but I only probably have about seven slips that people come and are on them

all weekend.

Mr. Shannon. Yes. Um, just a point of order. Um, maybe I'm missing something.

I see the proposed entrance. I don't see the proposed exits. It's the same. You didn't It's the same aisle. It's a 22 aisle for two-way traffic. Okay. So, my only concern is that um you're serving alcohol obviously. Uh, how do you police this, you know, entrance exit, you know, with alcohol? Right. So, I mean, we would obviously have someone stationed there full-time carting everybody coming

in. Rick, you mean the entrance to the just the bar area itself? Yes. Yes. So, Jeff Jeff was answering a different question. So, with regards I'll offer that with regards to that entrance being singular. Singular actually helps. Um, the building inspector has advised them to surround the property with blocks.

So, alcohol licensing and the building department sign off will deal with how alcohol gets handled on the site. There was it was a recommendation to take the food truck and put it on the same space so that people weren't walking from the bar area to food trucks outside of the bar area, which was what the previous plan showed. So right now all activity with regards to food and drink will be

within this patio area that will be surrounded by large concrete blocks or something similar for a barrier and everyone needs to come in and out of that one entrance area. Much easier to police but again not a zoning issue.

That'll be a licensing issue and a building department issue. Okay. Thank you. Well far far improved from from what it was previously. Thanks.

Do do we have the um the police fire EMS letters in here? I have copies here. We don't have them, but they should be read.

Yep.

Let's see. This is from EMS.

In response to request for the feasibility of ambulance response to the current Okonnell boatyard location, we receive we received the reviewed the area for accessible entry and exit for emergency medical services at the entrance to this location from Colin Street. The bridge located on this street uh does not meet the height requirements for ambulance and access to the location. The alternative would be

Clark Street which is um feasible with parking limited to only one side of the street and turned on to River Street will be tight uh with any parking on River Street uh with close proximity to the corner of Clark.

River Street is very narrow. There is no other immediate access to the site. We took one of our ambulances to the location to drive through the uh to ensure this information.

We feel please feel free to reach out.

Uh that is from Bethany Chief.

This one is from Fall River Police.

uh Deputy Chief uh JT to whom it may concerning the response to concerns regarding emergency vehicles access to River Street area. After reviewing historical calls to the service and response records, I found no documented incidents in which emergency vehicles were unable to access the properties in the area. To date, emergency services have not been hindered. That said, I do share the

concern that overflow parking along River Street, particularly during peak uh occupancy, could potentially cause an obstruction for emergency vehicles.

To proactively mitigate the risk, I recommend the implementation of clear no parking signs along the critical sections of the roadway. Uh we along with the traffic department can collaboratively enforce it. Also, additional overflow parking areas identified in the plan uh will contribute to alleviating any issues. Uh with these measures in place, I am confident that emergency access can continue unimpeded.

And lastly, from the fire department of the city of Fall River, this new letter has drive me crazy. Everybody looks the same. Um, on April 22nd, 2025, uh, Fire Chief Bacon and I conducted a site review of the property located at 180 River Street, Fall River, Okonnell Boat yard to assess the fire department vehicle access. During our visit, we met with Kyra Al Connell, and walk the grounds to ensure emergency access.

Based on our review, the fire department has determined the site provides adequate access for emergency vehicles and uh and supports the ability to conduct emergency operations as needed.

We understand the concern regarding access um if patrons park on River Street based on our assessment. We believe there should be adequate parking available on site to accommodate demand.

Should parking on rivery become a concern in the future, we believe implementing a residentonly parking restriction would be an effective solution.

Three departments sound like they're basically in agreement. Yeah. The only offer anything that I would have offer is that in the fire department's letter, we didn't ask for their opinion on the amount of parking. Just strictly access.

Fire department comment should be limited to their expertise.

That's all I have.

Let me smash a window because somebody's talking next to a fire hydrant. They're experts on parking. Trust me.

Any questions from the board at this point? Yeah, just one question. Yeah.

um is the open and close and also the hours of operation change. Um so after meeting with various members of uh Fall River the building inspector Mr. our hours of operation. We are going to request 7 days a week from 11:30 to 10 and from May 15th to October 31st May 13th to October 1st. May 15th to October 31st.

Close with a Halloween bash.

Any other questions from the board at this point?

said 11:00 a.m. to 10 p.m. 11:30.

You said seven days a week. Yes. Okay.

Let's go to the public and come back to the board if there are any questions.

Any additional questions? Is there anyone here wishing to speak um in favor in support of this uh this plan?

Seeing none. Is there any Sorry. Yes.

just identify yourself with your address as well, please. Yeah, my name is Barry McGrath of Massachusetts. I happen to rent one of the slips down.

I would just like to recognize the uh the efforts and I applaud Carol for opening this up to the public.

something that we enjoy every every time after work we go down and enjoy the sunset and I think the efforts to bring in food and entertainment the food truck is a phenomenal effort. I think everyone will benefit from it.

That's all I can say. Thank you very much.

Anyone else wishing to speak? I second that. Thank you. What's your name and address?

Mass.

Anyone else wishing to speak in support?

Sir, I'll speak in support of the uh proposal.

Uh my name is George Collius. I've been in Fall River for many years. I handle uh we had real estate business here for many years and at one time I was on French Street. I just happened to see this when I was looking sometimes we look through the We got three minutes, right? Yes, sir. Right. So, Danny, three minutes. I can keep going. Um, and I noticed the the uh petition and I know

Mi Ms. Okconor Kano and I knew her father, Captain Okonnell, very well. Um, so I was interested in it. I read it.

Uh, and now tonight I'm seeing this plan. What I know about Okonnell's boatyard is they have a very they keep a very tight ship there. Um, his boat was named a tough ship and it's a it's a it's an operation there. There's not much activity there. I've been there before. I've had boat there on and off for repairs. It's um it's well contained. It's not overly busy due the nature of the business, I guess. and

then having this type of uh change this type of use the way proposed and what I've heard in this briefly in this meeting with the amount of uh detail that we know goes into creating something like any sort of business seems like they're hand they're ding all the eyes and uh to me I'm I'm seems um I would say I'm positive for it. It seems like a great great use and a great

opportunity, let's say, as they said, for people in the north end to be able to get down to the waterfront uh seasonally.

Uh, and it doesn't seem uh to me based on some of where you see uh establishments like this, doesn't seem overly crowded or overly uh going to be an overall problem for the city. Uh, I'm I'm for it.

Thank you very much.

Are you You're still in the city, correct, sir? Do do you have a residence in the city or what is your address?

Well, I we have a res we have a family home at what is your where do you live?

Uh, Westport Breakpoint Road in Westport. Address just for the record.

Thanks. 180.

Anyone else to speak in favor?

Anyone to speak in opposition?

Want to go now? Yes. Oh, wait.

You can go first. Go ahead. Now? Yes.

How about Name and name and address first. Can you hear me? Yes. Yes, sir. All right. I can't hear you cuz I'm half deaf.

I'm too proud to get a hearing aid. My name is Arthur Hancock.

I am the only a butter to the Okonnell property. I own a 10 acre parcel which I have my small industrial marine manufacturing company.

The company incidentally is 100 years old to uh this year.

Uh my father started it and uh I've been running it since his death 60 years ago.

Uh I have no complaints or uh anything like that regarding this proposal. I have known the O'Connell for over 80 years of my 89y year life and I found them to be fairly decent people.

However, there is one little item that I would like to run in front of you. There are only two vehicle access roads to River Street.

Uh there's Clock Street and there's uh there's Colin Street.

Uh, Clock Street is fairly congested with tenant parking to the condos that are there on that street. The other street uh Colin Street, uh, has no parking whatsoever.

What I would like to do just for the sake of vehicle access, specifically larger truck access, is no parking on uh Clock Street and entrance and exit on Colin Street.

Now, the O'Connell Boatyard has got currently a sign at the corner of Colin Street and North Main Street.

I would humbly request that a small addition to that sign could be put in or a new sign saying the name of the proposed activity with an arrow going down.

That's about all I can say. I ask that when you do vote, vote fairly, honestly, and logically. Thank you. Good evening.

Thank you, Mr. Hancock.

Sir. Yes. Uh, good evening, Mr.

Chairman, members of the board. Uh, attorney Richard Cune with offices at 1334 Fall River Avenue, Secon, Massachusetts on behalf of Cynthia Palot is the uh, a butter of the property. Uh, she resides at 280 River Street in Fall River, Massachusetts. uh Miss Palot last time um the board had heard this matter had objected to the um to the petition.

She doesn't necessarily wish to object uh to the petition this time. But what she is concerned about is some of the same things that were uh mentioned by uh the first responders. So the access to the property, the uh width of the street, um my understanding is that should be about 20 ft. uh I think it's roughly 13 feet in front of Miss Palot's uh residence and the obstruction on

Collins Street was concerning to her um because it does lead for limited access to the the property. Um the the only other thing that she'd like to point out is the fact that while this may be a commercial mill district um there's significant residential um housing in that area. Of course the condominiums that uh the gentleman had spoken about uh which result the overflow parking and

of course this plot lives in a beautiful home right next to the marina. So that's essentially it. Okay. Very good. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak in opposition?

I'm seeing none. I come back to the board. Any other um just a couple of things. I mean I will call out that the applicant has spent a lot of time in my office as well as with the building department to answer all the questions that that we presented them with. the last time. So, we're very appreciative of that far improved plan, far improved submission. Um, you know, again, the letters from emergency responders

um basically mimics what our concerns were from the original meeting. So, you need to contemplate how do we deal with that. Is it a condition of approval with regards to no parking or that's for you to decide um on the streets knowing full well though that's that's permitting that would be required from different agencies in the city traffic police city council actually at the end of the day

to remove on street parking so I would be concerned about that um next would be with regards to the parking shown on the plan now I don't believe it contemplates any storage of boats that are to remain.

So, it should be clear that the parking shown on this plan, both permanent and overflow, shall be 100% available when this facility is open for the entire season.

And if it is not, if any of those spaces are encumbered, that would be in violation of of the decision if if the board. So, so as long as we can live with that, understand.

So, If we if we find out, okay, we want to open and we still got a garage full of codes even on the existing gravel surfaces can't open and you won't be able to operate.

With regards to site development itself, we'll have to go through the site plan review process. There's a lot of other additional permitting to take place beyond the zoning board of appeals.

Conservation Commission permitting, potential board of health permitting, site plan review permitting. Um site lighting should be taken into account to make sure that these parking areas are illuminated during the evening hours so that people are walking and driving in an illuminated parking lot. Um dumpster locations um additionally when we're dealing with River Street, I don't know if some requirement of

widening River Street should be required. Um not something that we normally deal with, right? So, it's either we have River Street, you either think it's adequate or you don't think it's adequate for the proposed use.

Any signage um as their butter commented, although it may make sense to add additional signage to that sign that's already out there, permitting that's not before you this evening. So, the only signage that can be installed now is what's in accordance with the bylaw on this property. No offsite signage, no signage on other There's no signage on a street. So that would require additional application and

additional relief. Um so I don't want you to put in conditions for signage.

No. Because that's not before you. Um hours of operation. We we discussed these hours of operation, you know, in my office. I I don't think I don't think they're impactful. I mean, the size of of the facility has shrunken. They've taken all of our comments and concerns with regards to bringing everything into one footprint so that when they leave here and go to permitting, a lot of what

we know are going to be permitting questions will be addressed already to make that process a little bit easier.

So, I I do think they've dotted all of those eyes, crossing all of those tees.

I think it really comes down to the what would happen with regards to overflow parking if needed. I hope you all the success in the world, but not to the point where we have 100 cars parked out on River Street. No, no, we don't because when we have a facility like this, although zoning requires only one space for four seats, no one's going to drive there, four people in a car. They're going to drive

there all by themselves. So with 150 people, let's say a hundred of them are going to drive themselves. So that's a 100 spaces that you really need. So that's why I'm saying that the need for the overflow shown, I think you're going to need it. So we have to make sure that that's open at all times. So I have a question like when what Mr. Hancock said signage, you know, resident parking only

for River Street. That's not for this.

Well, this board can make a condition that it become resident only or no parking on one side of the street, but they can't give you the permit. you would now have to go to another authority just like licensing. So if you went to the city council or if you went to traffic and they said no we're not making this no parking or we're not allowing you to do resident only parking

which nowhere in the city has then the then the decision is no good. Just wanted to understand that. That's fine.

So there there can be any condition of approval but you would need to comply with those conditions in order to operate. That's all. So my my concern with the parking issue because we have not had this issue on a public street before where we mandated we may mandate that uh an existing curb cut be eliminated to to provide additional parking etc. But in this case where we're considering

sections of River Street that would that would have no parking, can't we are we limited to just make recommendations to parking to the police, etc. Ultimately, you can make a condition that they have to make, and that's what I'm trying not to have happen, right? Um, I would also offer that police, fire, and although we're not asking them for their opinion on parking, they did not review the

revised plan where parking was more limited, the occupancy count was higher.

So, I have less of a concern about overflow parking now with the new layout with the number of new spaces shown and the commitment and the requirement that they provide and stay open. um knowing full well licensing you get open, right?

If there's one complaint, two complaints, licensing will shut you down. So, so there are teeth, you know, to deal with this beyond zoning. Um no, understood. I just as far as as far as zoning goes, they meet the requirements for parking. Correct. That's really all that's before you. Now, you need to contemplate the health, wealth, wealth, wellness, and safety of your neighborhood. Um, but I do think that

the revised plan does that. I believe it does as well. Miss Okonnell, if I can ask uh two questions. One in regards to to what uh Dan just brought up. If you end up with a bunch of boats, you know, you're ready to open and you know, there's a Trumpy and a couple of other things sitting there.

Can you move them into one of the sheds?

Yeah, I, as you can see, I have pretty large sheds. I have four sheds that can accommodate boats up to 50 feet inside, 95 of them. So, I have no problem that if there's a boat that's not quite ready, just picking it up and putting it inside and getting it out of the way to make sure you And there are some other gravel areas outside of the parking that you could store boats on as well.

One of the other questions then regarding the parking, as you mentioned, you're you're going to be able to keep some of your some of your staff working.

Um, I'm wondering if part of the solution to River Street is parking staff. If somebody's out there saying you can't park there or I you know I live right there I I am sure there will be some level of self-p policing otherwise they're going to lose their license right so I think we would have to let and see how that plays out the only problem that I have with that is

it may be too late when we find out right god forbid that something happens to someone and it was because emergency apparatus couldn't get there um but again this is this to the zoning board of appeals, right? Make a recommendation about no parking. So the city council to look at review no parking on the street. Well, but what but what if the city council said no, we're not we're going to leave

the street the way that it is. So it should either be a condition of approval or not contemplated at all in your decision.

If if there becomes an issue and they lose their license, then at that point in time, they can approach the city themselves in order to get their license back. And are not those issues the issues are usually addressed in site review? No.

No, you don't get access to parking.

Nope. Because parking the only thing that we would look at with parking is do they meet the bylaw? Are they in accordance with the variance plan that that you either approve or deny? the lighting and that type of lighting. Is this something that is that would be addressed through site plan review?

Council, this may be something you want to consult with your your client on.

Maybe you end up in front of city council specifically talking about the the parking. I'm not comfortable making it a condition of this board. I think that we're we're going into water that we we haven't gone through before.

And I'm sure there's a rock in it. I don't really want to ding my prop on it.

So, um I mean there's one one other option.

Um you could condition we got 98 parking spaces total. Yes. You could condition the occupancy to 100 and then if there are no issues come back next year and increase it to 150. I I don't I don't know the the business model or any of those things, but if you're looking for a way to equate I I don't think they will have a problem with the amount of parking. I think they

do a tremendous job with this site plan for for the the overflow parking, the primary parking, etc. As long as it's available, you address stuff as long as it's available. So, okay, Mr. Chairman, in view of the substantial changes in the compliance with our earlier request, I move that the uh petition be approved subject to site review. Second, you might want to state the hours of operation only because they're not

written anywhere. So, seven days of operation as presented. Okay. Also, Dan, seeing that it's um special permit, um you need two motions. Yeah, you can wrap them into one.

And I I move that we find that it is not more substantially detrimental to the area than the existing operations. I second.

Any other discussion on the motion?

There being none, Dan.

Yes.

Jim, yes. John, yes. Alexis, yes. in prayer. Yes. Best of luck. Thank you very much. Good luck. Thank you. Thank you.

Number two.

Item number 02. This is um this was tabled at the May 15th, 2025 meeting.

Applicant is Brad T. Turner will return attorney Peter Relino Zia Street map G16 lot 13. The applicant is require requesting a special permit to allow the following one personally to section 86-425 of the ordinance. The applicant uh proposes to extend the existing non-conforming structure by adding a second floor. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the following. fund to convert the existing

garage into a two-unit residential apartment building with four off- streetet parking spaces waving the requirements of 86-35 attachment one and section 8636 uh attachment two of the city of fall river zoning bylaws. Thank you. Good evening.

This is an A2 apartment zoning district.

Sorry about that. Council, thank you.

Good evening. For the record, Peter Seleno on behalf of the applicant, Brad Turner, who's the owner of the property.

Uh, as the board will recall at the last meeting, there was an objection to this proposal or a couple of different objections. So, we thoughtfully went back uh re-watched the tape, thought about the objections, and so we'd like to address those this evening in pursuit of this petition. So, first, it seemed like one of the strenuous objections was the existing structure and whether or

not it could support a second floor. As a result, my clients hired uh Rob Gay to do a structural evaluation. I believe there should be a letter in the record, but I have copies as well. Uh Mr. Gay went to the site and rendered an opinion uh in his role as a PE professional engineer that the building as constructed now could support a second floor. You may remember that attorney brilliant was here last time on behalf

of Inabutter and um characterized the structure as dilapidated and called into question its structural integrity. So the uh first step in our argument tonight is to present that letter because we think it addresses one of the substantial objections that occurred. Uh next, when we looked back at the street, meaning Saucier Street, there are many other multifamilies on that street, six total,

that are two families. And we feel like when we looked at this again, the highest and best use of this structure is still as a two family. And we say that for a couple of reasons. Uh first obviously the property immediately to the left labeled 18 is a two family and then there are other two families surrounding it. And second by utilizing the existing garage stalls that keeps cars off the street by allowing them to

park within the building. So as we looked back at that and maybe moving the building, we decided that it was better to come back before the board this evening uh with a letter from Mr. Gay and keeping the building uh where it sits. Next, there was an objection uh relative to the fact that if a second floor is put on the existing structure that it will impede light, view, general

enjoyment of the property at 18 saucier.

Uh that caused my clients to do some digging and they went to the planning department and the building department and they learned that in 1989 that structure was enlarged. The city does not have any records of any permits, but it looks like through the enlargement of that structure, it actually got closer to the existing garage, which is there now. It's only 2 and 1/2 ft uh from the

property line. And then the windows or the large majority of the windows on 18 saucier uh are on the left side, plan left. Okay? And so when you talk about weighing a detriment and thinking about how something negatively impacts a butter, I'd submit to you that with only two windows on the right side of the house, the second floor shouldn't overly neg overly negatively impact the owners

of 18. Next, uh the owners of 36 saucier also expressed some objection last time.

Similarly, my clients did due diligence at the city hall and it looks like there's a deck on 36 Saucier that the city does not have any record of permits for, but that deck is 2 and 1/2 ft from the property line. The same setback that my client uh is proposing. And then there were also several concerns raised about life, safety, and fire. And as a result of those concerns, I'd submit the

following. The new construction proposed obviously would comply with fire code.

And I know that there was a fire many years ago uh further down the street, but ultimately the new fire codes I'd submit to you would help suppress or mitigate fire. Uh next, the subject location is within 150 ft of a fire uh hydrant and a block from the fire station. And then lastly, my clients wish for me to clarify one thing that went on last time relative to the distance between the two buildings. So

the distance between the two buildings is four. No, it's No, it's five feet.

Five total. Okay. just over 5 ft on the saucier side. Okay. And four and a half due to their encroachment of the of the building built in 1988.

Okay. So last time we were reading the plan and there were arguments back and forth about 2 and 1/2 ft 1 and 1/2 ft.

So uh I was asked to bring that up as part of the record as well. So, in closing for my presentation, I'd submit to you that with this careful analysis of the structural integrity of the building as well as weighing the detriment, I think a special permit is appropriate because I don't think the request is more detrimental. Um, in fact, uh, Mr. Gay had um, communicated with Justin Vieira, who's an architect,

and they talked about the dangers of just having a garage that stores motorcycles and gas filled equipment uh, in and of itself. And as a result of that, we think the residential use is less dense and a and a better use.

Uh so with that, I'm happy to take any questions or Mr. Turner can answer questions should they arise.

Any questions from the board before I go? Anything from you, Dan? Yeah, we'll stop. Um Attorney Seleno, you've you've referenced a number of dimensions today and distances. Yeah. Who determined those measurements and distances? Uh the four feet and 5T and all that. the 2 and 1/2 ft. My client My client measured them. Is he a professional land surveyor? I had a surveyor there. It's

not on the plan. Who was the surveyor that went for the 2 and 1/2 ft? You're question all the new dimensions that attorney Selena was referencing tonight.

Oh, yeah. The surveyor did my property.

I did not pay a survey for their property. Right. But you are you're saying that you have dimensions from that building to the property line.

Yeah. Which I dimensions come from. I I had measure taking pictures just as the attorney for that covered 32 had did last time. Got it. Okay. Um attorney Seno also stated and the exact words were that he didn't feel that this overly negatively impacts the neighborhood but it does negatively impact the neighborhood. In this interpretation just not overly is the term that was used. Um, we still need to get by

the variance portion of this request, which is to allow the residential structure on a lot that does not conform to the zoning district. I haven't heard an argument with regards to that. It's special permit about extending an existing non-conforming building under the sections of the bylaw that allow that, but the change in use still requires a variance. That's why this is the special permit and the variance to

be discussed tonight. So, so those those are my concerns. With regards to any history of of the lot next door, irrelevant to this proposal because if it was allowed to go to three stories high, it was contemplated at that time that there was a one-story garage next door. So, there wouldn't have been an issue of raising the height of that building. Um, that's all I have to offer, Mr. Chairman. I I I I understand

the letter from the structural engineer.

Great. that that does help and to provide answers to one question, but I would still have great concerns regarding the remainder of the petition.

Yeah. And I think the the the comments made about, you know, the House at 18, you know, being allowed to encroach more in 1986 or whatever the time frame was, and someone else encroaching on the other side. That doesn't mean encroaching to or or exist or increasing that type of disturbance along the the lot line or building along the lot line is is is any better. The building's already

there. It's two and a half, one and a half, however many feet it is off the off the lot line. The building next door is is short distance off the lot line.

Um, I I appreciate your I I didn't go look at windows when I went out there to realize there were only a couple of windows on that side of the building at 18, but we still got we're still going out. We're still creating a greater situation and anybody can opine about whether it's more dangerous to have motorcycles and cars in a garage that's still going to have cars in it. Um and I realize that the

you know of course anything to built today is going to be in according to fire code. I don't know the fire code the adjacent building to it. I don't know their adherence to the fire code.

You know where they stand? They even have you know they're multif family house. They have a hardwired system. Do they just have battery powered smoke detectors? I have no idea what's in that building. So, if that one goes up two and a half feet away, fire department can't even really get into battle a blaze. That's where I get itchy about something like this. We can't we can't stack every piece of land with two and

three story buildings that are two or four feet apart. That's an opinion.

Let's see what the audience has to say.

Is anyone here anyone else on the board before we go?

Is there anyone here to speak in favor of this petition?

Is there anyone to speak in opposition to this petition? Yes, ma'am. I am the owner of 18 Celsius Street right next to it. And still your name, please. Sure.

And I still feel the same way that there shouldn't be a house that close to my windows on the second floor. We're looking at that. You just put a piece of plywood and you can actually have dinner with the next door. I just also is the parking. I mean, we're talking about it's a little alleyway. That's pretty much what it is.

It is just an alleyway that is between one house and the other. And also we have already a hard time with parking.

Him opening up another entrance for his tenants. It's going to take two to two at least two spots for that. And again, it's the fire so close to my house.

What's your name for the record? I'm sorry. Your name? My name? I'm sorry.

Anna Prock P. I'm the trustee.

is Maria Isidoro.

I'm very concerned about that.

It's not me. No, it's me. I'm not calling right now.

Let's try that.

This is what happens when my meeting gets moved by a week. Supposed to be running another meeting tonight and somebody's locked out.

Um, anyone else? Anyone else um wishing to speak in opposition? Hi, sir. My name is Roger St. Martin. I uh former fire service professional. Um I lived at 32 Street for a couple years. As my mom over here, she owns the property. Uh my biggest concern is the proximity of the building to other structures. Um difficulty in accessing the road for as a for suppression. Can you can you access

through it? Absolutely. Um cars parked on Wilbur Street uh on the corner. It's very difficult to actually make that turn. Um I know in the past sometimes we've had to buck one way and come the opposite direction.

The other thing now is um their parking is very limited over there like um like the attorney mentioned, it's a very congested area with three family, two family houses. Um taking another spot would would be detrimental to the area and um the right across the street just down the street is a softball field and I think about seven to eight months out of the year any weekend or night the is

even more congested because of the softball tournament, softball games that are there. So, um, so that's that's another concern that we have in the general area. So, um, again, my name is Roger St. Martin. I live at one Stony Brook in Westport, Massachusetts. I'm sorry.

So, again, that's that's my uh my mother's concern and my sister's concern that lives in the back house as well.

Okay. It's a very congested area and We've had fires on that road, two fires that I can recall. And it is it is a very difficult place to access. It is a very narrow road. And if you have vehicles parked on the side, um more difficult. So So thank you. Thank you.

Anyone else wishing to speak on opposition? Yes, ma'am. My name is Marcel Robinson. I live at 32 district with my mother. Um I just want to second what my brother said here. Um it is a very difficult road. Parking is extremely um difficult especially I work second shift I pick up shifts at night at times at 11 o'clock at night I'm walking from Globe Street through the park it isn't safe for us taking another

parking space would really be detrimental um and that turn because it is a oneway coming in just that turn alone so maybe they'd only be removing one spot but no one would be able to park there anyway because the way they would have to turn into that lot it would be almost impossible So, it would be two spots and that would just be awful for us and our safety. You know, I

have I have a niece who's young in her 20s. I and she lives in the back house.

I'm not comfortable with her walking down the street um at night and things like that, especially when the baseball games are going on and we know they're going on all hours of the night. It's it's a big safety concern.

Thank you. Anyone else wishing to speak on opposition?

board members. I add one thing um that there's been conversation about taking away parking on Zia Street with this new driveway by city ordinance, not zoning.

Every property owner is afforded a 16 ft curb. So whether this petition passes or not, this applicant has the ability to install a 16oot driveway opening. So that that should not be contemplated. Um they are taxpayers. They are afforded by ordinance a 16 foot curve open to be fair to both sides. Yeah, there's questions we got to the board questions response to any of those comments. I

just in response to the Mr. Aguar's comment about the hardship in my mind and maybe I'm wrong but I think I talked about the hardship at the original hearing which is the existence of the structure. So, in my mind, I was coming here to reopen a hearing that that was already presented. So, I apologize if I didn't do a good job of that. But for the record, the hardship is the existing

structure and its proximity to the sideline. Do you want to offer any responses, Brad or Jess?

No. Okay.

I'm just sure you don't want to move the building.

Not right now. I don't see how we would do without another variance. So, so there's an existing structure been there for almost 100 years. Now, you're notifying yourself. I'm just Well, and and it's an A2 district. I'm just trying to meet what's the zoning gives in the area. So, well, you you don't meet the area requirement for even a single family lot even with the new zoning.

6500 for require 5,000 square feet. Oh, yes. 5,00 would be 10 ft. So, the city just went beyond what it normally would to modify this A2 zoning district to allow things like this to be a little bit easier. Um, but that would be a single family that meets the 10-ft setbacks. If you met the setbacks, um, the only relief you would need is 750 square feet of area, right?

You have the frontage, you you exceed the lot coverage.

You might want to contemplate something like that. Now if the board denies the project there is a process by which you can reappear within two years but that takes you back through the planning board process for a repetitive petition more time more money but I can't tell you how

will that be different that be different okay so we'll take the vote, right? Yeah. Okay. Okay. Then I turn to the board. We have a variance for the uh because of the expansion of the existing non-conforming and by adding two apartments we have the special permit.

Do with the variance portion of first.

You won't get a special.

So the variance is convert the existing garage into two uh two unit residential apartment buildings with four off street parking wavering requirements of section 8635 attachment one 8636 attachment two Mr. Sharon, I make a motion to deny because of the second story going up too close to that house next door. Thank you.

Second.

Very good.

And on the motion, uh, Alexis, yes.

John, yes. Jim, yes. Ricky, yes. And Cher, yes. For formality purposes, go through the vote for special permit as well.

you can just get bifurcated. You don't have to get past it first if you consider it to be substantially more detrimental to extend the existing non-conforming structure. Yeah, Mr.

Chair, can I I make the motion to state that it is more detrimental to the neighborhood and also to deny the petition special.

Second on the motion. Ricky, yes. Jim, yes.

John, yes. Alexis, yes. Jim Pra, yes.

Thank you.

New business.

You got to get Dan. Where's Dan? Chief, can you just tell Danny come back in, please?

Thank you, gentlemen.

Take a quick five minute break.

Item number four. We're going out of order again just to drive people a little crazy. Sagundo Awaldo Palar Morokco Moro I'm going close excuse me Kov attorney Peter Aelino 673 686 Braton Avenue map F06 lot 49.

The applicant has requested a variance to allow the following. To subdivide the existing parcel into two parcels, leaving an existing two family dwelling on parcel two and erect a single family dwelling on parcel one seeking waiver of uh waiver from section 86 attachment one of the zoning ordinance as to frontage pertaining to parcel one and setbacks and lot coverage uh pertaining to parcel

two. The property is in an R4 two family zoning district council. Good evening.

For the record, Peter Selenino, on behalf of the applicant petitioner, uh, briefly, my client, uh, wishes to withdraw the petition without prejudice.

Therefore, I'm making a motion from the floor to withdraw it.

Mr. Chairman, grant information without prejudice.

Second on that.

Very good. On the petition, are we back to John? Yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes. Ricky yes and chairman Ferry yes thank you very much thank you now we'll go back to uh item number one applicant is Anton Benvites 38 Judge Street um map V09 lot 10 this is an after the fact filing um the applicant is is requesting a variance to allow the following to enclose an existing ing

deck on the east side of the property uh property line making it a fourseason room waving uh waving the requirement requirements of section 86-34 the uh property is located uh within S single family zoning district council good evening for the record Peter Selino on behalf of the applicant petitioner um Mr. for Anton Benvites. He's immediately to my left. He is the property owner. Uh

I certainly recognize that after the fact variances generally get people's attention. So I'd like to begin with a little history of this project. Uh the project was granted relief before this board in 2021.

And the relief uh allowed the second story addition to be added, a deck and a porch to be added. And there were a couple of conditions relative to site plan and off- streetet parking. Uh Mr.

Benvites is a plumber by trade. He hired a general contractor to uh build the project. He I think fairly assumed that the contractor was doing what he was supposed to do until uh Mr. Hathaway contacted him to let him know that they exceeded the scope of this permit and enclosed the deck and porch. And so ultimately what ends up happening is he uh through a series of prior events had

had it with his contractor. That was the straw that broke the camel's back. He fired the contractor. He's now got a new contractor, but the project is in significant jeopardy in the following ways. Uh, first, the bank stopped funding the transaction. Uh, so he's funding it out of pocket, and he was very candid with me relative to how that's hurting him financially. Um, next, the house was designed uh with um

a view towards the water, and so he'd like to keep that structure there. Um he feels as though he's an innocent bystander in this. Um this is not the after the-act situation where he's coming before you saying I'm sorry I didn't know. In fact, he's going to speak and he knows and he uh stressed to me that as a plumber he knows the importance of permits and he knows uh

better. And so he was so dismayed that he fired the contractor, putting himself in harm's way and was very candid that if he had to take the property down, he doesn't even have the finances to do it.

So we come before you this this evening on this petition to ask for an after the-act variance um acknowledging that the real true hardship here relates to the fact that he was put in this position against his will. And Tony, do you want to add anything to that? Yes.

Um, I'm not arguing Mr. Hathway's decision that it wasn't correctly um done, you know, as far as the permits weren't pulled properly. And but when I we discussed the design of the first part of the house and the second part being enclosed, the first part of the house was designed for the second part being enclosed. So, so all the plumbing was done, all the electric was done, everything was designed. So, the back

would be part of the house. Now the So when they went down and pull the permits, they pull the permits for the roof and the deck and not the walls. So whenever Mr. Hather came and told me they didn't pull the permits, I was like, what is it's like a nightmare. I'm like, what is going on here? You know, this is after at least 10 things that these guys did

wrong, chasing around. I mean, I I can't even tell you. I'm a plumber. I pull permits. I see houses being built and I just couldn't believe it was happening to me. I couldn't stop them. I couldn't pull a permit back from city hall off from the bank. They made me they wanted me to get um signatures them to sign off, but they were trying to endorse, you know, get more money out of me. And

I'm like, you're not getting anymore.

You've already stolen they we're talking fraud, bank fraud. I mean, they were giving they're giving um receipts, double receipts to the bank, and it was a nightmare. The only reason they let it go is because I seen a piece of paper on their desk. I took my phone out. took a picture of it and it basically had checks signed off to their family members with my property and my bank my

entire house on it. Then the guy basically said, "Okay, I'm sorry. I made a mistake. I'll sign off." It's the only reason they signed a permit to let me off them get off my property and for me to move forward. Now I got to finance the whole thing out of pocket, which is I'm barely going to make it to be honest with you. If this is allowed, I'm just

barely making it now. And so I uh I do understand the the rules permits and and I respect that and I I do 100% always abide by it. But um uh I'm in this position in front of you now and I'm just hoping I can just get through. So let me ask a couple questions. When this was originally permitted, that was a deck, correct? In the rear. Yes. Yeah.

What's the foundation under that? Right now they have they built it as see when they first started building it would four season room was discussed before the deck was built. So they built it as a fourseason room to be structured be to hold a fourseason room. Is it sonic tubes or is it full foundation? Sonic tubes because because the EPA that's what he's asking.

Yeah.

Now, the building permit you had was for what?

The building that they took out, not the building permit they pulled out was for a roof and the decking. It was It was for a deck and the deck to have a cover.

Just no walls. So, the deck would have been covered. If anything, you may have put screens up, that type of thing.

Yeah. So, basically, it's three walls we're talking about. Yeah. And then when Glenn went to do an inspection, permanent walls were constructed, started the whole process. Um, Mr. Ben came to my office, explained to me the problem with Glenn, I explained to him, albeit a long and drawn out process and and making it more difficult, the way to resolve it, to come back before the board, acknowledge

the issue, and seek the relief that was previously granted. The footprint is no larger than what was previously granted.

If the board chooses to, they can condition that no further expansion of the structure take place, whether it be second floor, rear yard, sideyard, anything else. But at least it'll get him past where he's at now.

Got it. Anyone else on the board?

Questions, comments? Just to be clear, attorney, you're not asking for any further expansion. No, we're here to say there's a mistake and he wants to keep the walls that are there. Right. So you can live with a variance being granted under the condition that there's no further expansion. Yeah. Right. Right.

Yeah. Correct.

Anything else from the board? Let me go to the public. Uh I will tell you, Mr.

Benabites, if you know this or not, we've got six of your neighbors that signed a petition in favor of your situation. Uh, I'm asking uh I'm asking you that I am in favor of an of an additional addition of a four-season deck on the water side of the property at 38 Jud Street. The addition will not change anything of the structure uh to the single family home.

Uh and I have no obstruction to the view the pond or this area. And as as you know, there's uh six six different signatures from the neighborhood on here. So, is there anybody here to speak in in uh favor or support?

No. Anyone to speak in opposition?

I turn to the board. Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant the variance.

Second. Do you want to put the cautilansion?

I don't because I don't know what other 10 years from now what he might want to do. So I don't see any reason for that restriction.

Will you still second the motion? Well because right now under the previous variance he would be allowed to put a second floor on this.

So the new variance and the new condition would preclude that. These abutters have written a letter under the guise that this building is not going to change. So I want to make sure that there's not a second floor placed on this now obstructing their view which they've signed on to in favor of this relief with that not happening.

Just contemplate second floor. No. Okay.

Can I just add there is no second floor then right I would never ask for under no under the original variance which allowed the deck in the first place also allowed a second floor. So if you're going to allow and close the deck and that's what the abuters have signed on to a petition form. Right. In that letter it says specifically that it's not blocking their views. Right. So we

want to make sure that you're not going to go back now and pull a permit for the second floor. No. Absolutely. So that condition would preclude that from being able to happen.

I'll accept the amendment.

Okay.

All right. Approve the variance with the uh condition that there be no additional expansion of the structure. You're okay with that as a second. In that case, on the on the motion, Ricky, yes. Dan, yes.

Jim, yes. John, yes. And chairman Prairie, yes. Thank you.

Give me the name of that contractor. I don't want to.

Did I say it out loud? No.

No. Hire applicant.

Item number two. The applicant is Imigen Pharmaceuticals Incorporated, care of civil and environmental consultants.

Subject property is 927 current road, map Z3, lot 71. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following relief modification from uh the current 20oot parking setback requirements of section 86202E in accordance with the provisions of 86445.

The applicant proposes to construct parking spaces 5T from the abiding property lines to increase parking for an expanding workforce property is located within the IP industrial park zoning district. Good evening. Good evening everyone. Thank you. My name is Brian Potman. I'm with Civil and Environmental Consultants.

I'm Connor Brennan. I'm also with Civil and Environmental Consultants. Good.

Welcome, gentlemen. Thank you. Uh we're here on behalf of Invigen Pharmaceuticals. Uh this is an existing facility that they have at 927 Current Road. They have an interest in increasing the park employee parking spaces within their site. the proposed parking area.

Uh we're requesting a a special permit to reduce the parking setback from 20 ft to 5 ft and uh with fencing uh adjacent to it. And uh happy to entertain any questions, but uh the existing driveway location will remain the same. The traffic flow in and out of the site remains the same. There are no proposed improvements to the uh facility itself.

Uh just the gray shaded areas would be uh constructed uh in parking spaces increased uh in terms of number account and that's okay is actually internal is it is a special permit or is it a variance? So and I think we can do it as a special permit. So I I consulted with the building inspector because he has the final say in the matter. Um and when you read 86445 and it says that all parking requirements

herein, it doesn't say in the section of parking. It says herein which means this entire cover book. So the determination was made that anything with regards to parking normally it's space the industrial park district is the only district that has a specific setback for parking other than what's enumerated in the parking section of the bylaw. So, the building inspector has made the

determination that that section of the industrial park parking setback can be approved through a special permit under 86445 which allows for a waiver of any parking requirement here. So, that was the determination by the zoning official and that's what's before you tonight. So, it's not for you to determine whether or not a variance is needed or not. No, that's just just one of those little quirks. Yeah, different

kind of fun. Anything from the uh board?

Any questions? Comments? Just addressing this section in the corner here that says uh elimination of of encroachment.

Um so you're reworking the parking to fix that problem, right? Yeah. When we conducted the survey, we realized that there was some couple of parking spaces that were on the abuing property. And so, as part of that, we're eliminating that pavement and uh and pulling the the proposed parking out of that. Yep.

Correct.

Okay.

Turning to the general public, anyone wishing to speak in support?

Anyone wishing to speak in opposition?

They're hearing none. Needing more employee parking is a good problem to have.

Mr. Chairman, I find that the variance is not substantially more detrimental to the area.

Special. Yeah. Are the request second motion and second?

John, yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes. Ricky, yes. Prairie. Yes. Best of luck over there. Wonderful. Thank you. Have a good evening. You too. Thank you.

Where am I? Item number three.

Applicant is Maria Fatima Benson 452 South Main Street Math I8 Log 4. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the following. one relief from section 8636 attachment 2 allowing the conversion of an existing structure into a 5 unit residential apartment building in the CBD district. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following. Um that is relief from 86441

to allow eight parking spaces in lie of the required 10 spaces. The property is located in the CBD central business zoning district. Good evening. Hi. Good evening. Hi. Who are you? I'm I'm her son, her lackey, her business partner.

And your name? Zach Leoni, 478 Harvard Street.

So, tell us about uh this was this was previously approved. We never acted on it. So, we're asking for a reapproval. I remember this one. This was the uh the bridal shop. Yeah. The old where our shop used to be located. I didn't realize it expired in a year.

Okay. So, this is exactly the same. It's exactly the same as what was done in 2023. Y I believe so it was only the variance portion that had expired. The special permit still valid granting both again so that we may as well clean it up just in case we wait an additional time period and we don't let it expire. We've learned. Any questions from the board on this one?

Dan was here. Ricky, I can't remember.

You were here. Yeah, I got nothing. But I will ask, anyone here wishing to speak uh in support of this petition?

Anyone wishing to speak in opposition?

They're hearing none. Turn to the board.

Mr. Chairman, can we take both of them in one motion? Darian, is that special plan? You you could you could make a motion to reestablish the previously granted relief and that would cover that would cover everything. I so moved that we have second discussion on the motion there hearing none. John yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes.

Ricky, yes. Sher, yes. And that is variance and special purpose. Sounds better. Thank you. Thanks so much. So appreciate it. Have a good night.

Let's see. Number four is withdrawn.

Number five, Little Tiger Capital LLC.

Car of Attorney Peter Celino. There's no A in this one. It's going to be a different Celino. Okay. Um the property is uh 39 South Main Street.

uh map in 18 lots 15 and 15x.

Cool. Um the applicant is requesting the variance to allow the following. One to convert existing an existing professional office building into a mixeduse building containing up to 70 residential apartments and for commercial or professional space to section 86-37 uh B to allow residential use on the first floor. The applicant is requesting a special permit to allow the following pursuant to 86425A

to continue to utilize the existing non-conforming structure. Two, pursuant to 86445 to wave parking requirements and applicant proposes to meet the requirements for parking as set forth in 86- uh 376E2 of the following zoning ordinance. The property is located in the CBD and AOD central business in Arts Overlay zoning district. Good evening. For the record, Peter Selenino on behalf of the

applicant, Little Tiger Capital LLC.

Immediately to my left is the principal of the LLC. Go ahead and say your name.

Hi, my name is Carolyn Hurtth. Uh the little tiger. I am the little tiger. She is the little tiger. Uh so, Miss Hurtth has a purchase and sale agreement to purchase 139 South Main Street from the current owner. Uh that purchase is conditioned upon zoning approval. The proposal before you this evening is to convert the existing office building into up to 70 units. Um we'll go into

detail relative to the bedroom counts, etc. Um and as the chairman stated, there are three uh zoning issues here tonight. It's the variance for firstf flooror residential along South Main Street. It's a special permit to continue to use the uh existing non-conforming structure. and finally to wave the parking requirements. Uh, Miss Hurtth has prepared an excellent presentation as well as some boards. So,

I'd like to allow her to uh briefly indulge the board in her experience with these types of projects and why she's excited about coming to Fall River before we address the substance of the zoning. Okay. Hi, thank you for your time and consideration of this matter.

Um I am asking the zoning board uh to be able to allow 70 market rate apartments and seven commercial spaces in the existing building. This will be a luxury um market rate development. Um we will execute within two years and uh I mean immediately but we'll stabilize with renters within two years. We have substantial experience in doing this and I um listed some recent projects that

went two years max or under two years and we very very much believe that this fits in with the city master plan on several levels. Um a little bit about us. I have 17 years in real estate development construction um background. I have the largest building I've ever built with a team was 300 units. Um but we've done a number of conversions over the years. Uh my other partner Ryan Wood is specializes in

turnarounds in private equity on the deal team and in operations. And then we have um the people that I've been fortunate to train under the Okonnell brothers um Okonnell Development Marina Bay Management um also backing us and wanting to partner with us. They did many projects uh that transformed Quinsey as well as Boston and out of state. Uh notably Marina Bay, uh Granite Links, um World Trade Center, Bayside

Expo Center, Hines Convention, um you name it, they definitely can help and execute this beautiful project. Um I want to now um do an overview of Should I jump into this? Yeah, sure. Um well, first I want to say that I did a market study and see that there's over 2 million square feet of active commercial space in the city that's just sitting there. Um varies on days in market, but

it but it is sitting there. If you take into account some lots, it's over 4 million square feet. Um there's a desperate need for market rate apartments. Um, another study that we did shows that right now it's approximately 27% affordable with 46% considered low income and that leaves about, you know, 30% to market. So, I definitely think that this is a project that will help fulfill the need. Um, and now I want to

and it's also very much in line with BCEDC's mission. um that has helped a lot of businesses in city. So I think that you know alto together this is a beautiful fit. Um I want to go into now some of the renderings that we've prepared. Our intention is to bring a luxury down town seapport finish type building um to to downtown. Um this one would be with also I love the historical

element of this and I love certain features. So, like we're going to keep the tavern floors. We're going to keep the grand staircases. We're going to keep the beautiful tin ceilings. Um we're going to we want to keep, you know, a couple of the commercial storefront um in the same locations and and basically do the residential elsewhere. So, I think that's also a good fit. Um this is the first one of

what the lobby would look like. Um, it's basically like a coffee bar with a beautiful amenity space highlighting um, a little bit of new and some of the old beautiful features.

Um, this is an example of what kind of finishes. We're actually already quoting the countertops, coarse countertops, um stainless steel appliances, in unit laundry, um beautiful oak floors, um and modern cabinets.

And these renderings are actually what we're bitting out right now for for finishes. So, it's it's going to look the exact same. I promise you that. Um this is just another view. And see, we're not changing the facade at all.

All the original windows are still in the renderings. We've worked around them. We've measured extensively. Um, we don't have to make any changes.

And we we would name it Cherry and Loft.

Uh, Cherry and Web Luxury Lofts on name to kind of pay homage to to this beautiful building. Um, this is an example of what the hallways will look like. modern doors carrying through the beautiful oak floors.

And uh we have ample ample amenity space. One of my favorite that I'm not seeing a lot around here is um this amazing roof deck of just see the water and the Fall River Bridge and I I can just envision myself going up there at night and and um enjoying it.

Um finally, here's another example. We also put um plenty amenity space such as a spa in the subb. We're going to do Himalayan salt uh steam steam sauna. Um flex rooms so that people can rent them for free just to host parties and whatnot. Pet washing stations, media lab so you can go and get some work done um with the community. Um as well as uh movie theater, a screening room in

there as well. So, and uh you know also renting to local shops.

This is a collapsing. So, I'm going to take those down. I'm so sorry.

It's got a timer in it. That's all. By the way, no matter what you name it, it will always be the building. No, we would we we want to name it that way.

Okay. So would you like to go over the uh bedrooms and uh unit count please?

Sure. Um so the unit mix is towards the end. Um it's on the presentation. It will be 26 studios, 27 onebedrooms, seven onebedrooms with dens and eight two bedrooms. So mostly trying to attract young professionals or couples um to not overwhelm, you know, anything um that will just basically have disposable income to um to spend in the local economy. That's that's the idea.

That's the whole plan.

Um and we're confident that this fits well into Fall River's master plan. Um if you flip through the middle of the presentation, um I literally read like 176 pages of the master plan and we extracted um how this line by line how this how this meets many of the missions in the master plan um as well as the waterfront redevelopment. Um and my closing lines I guess would be that we

are very much in in line with the master plan um with BCEDC uh through this appro pro approvals process. So far we have already employed all local third parties which is our intention. We love working down here.

Um, we love everyone that we've worked with so far, including architects, stark architects um surveyors attorneys and brokers. Our intention is to continue partnering partnering with local banks, suppliers, trades, employees, uh, to revitalize the iconic Cherry and Web building. We believe that we believe in the city's master plan and we would very very much like and appreciate the opportunity to bring a

spectacular revitalization downtown and um we have the Okonnell's attention with this and and they want to do more and I' I'd love to do more mill buildings. Um I just hope I hope this is one of many.

Thank you Carolyn. Uh so relative to the legal side of the petition uh and starting with the variance request uh so you probably know this but in that section of main street you cannot have residential on the first floor and therefore I'm asking for a variance. I'd submit to you that the hardship uh would be the existing structure um as it sits on the ground. You could certainly argue

shape of the parcel at large or the shape of the building. uh relative to the special permit component. Um I don't think the proposal is more detrimental and I think that we need to go into parking in order to highlight why I don't think it's more detrimental than what's there or what could be there or allowed by rights. So Mr. Chairman, can I approach with some parking calculations?

Be very interested to see what you've come up with here. So, uh, what I've just submitted into the record is a set of parking calculations, uh, prepared that look at the existing structure and the parking load, um, that it could, uh, avail itself of right now. And so, uh, getting to the summary of it, um, currently, I think conservatively, we could justify that there could be 173

parking spaces required based on current uses. And it's respectfully submitted to the board that ultimately the proposed use if we seek a waiver of one to one which has become uh something that often happens in this room we would only need 70 spaces which is over 100 spaces less than what could be there now based on the current use of the property and the occupants of the property. So when

weighing the detriment I'd submit to you that the detriment is not greater than what is already there when we look at the proposed use. uh based on the number of required spaces with a one-toone waiver as well as the peak times. Um similar arguments have been made throughout downtown, but I'd suggest to the board respectfully that um occupants in this building are going to be coming

home from work now and they'd be looking for parking and then they're going to get up and out and go to work. So, the peaks for a project like this are different than the peaks on South Main Street um and or Second Street andor back down on Milickin Boulevard. And so, I believe that we actually do better as a city with the parking waiver here than we would do with a commercial building.

No disrespect to what it currently is, but uh when you look at these calculations, I'd submit to you that uh what's being proposed by my client is much less detrimental than what could actually be required. Um, and uh, finally, in terms of the special permit relative to the continuation of the non-conforming structure, uh, I would suggest to the board that obviously this is a great piece of property in the

center of our city and, um, continuing to utilize it and revitalize it, I think, is in everyone's best interest in the city. And so, I'm happy to take any questions. Uh but I think we've laid out a hardship, the detriment and uh parking as well as the nice presentation that Miss Earth prepared. Okay. In regard to the parking, first of all, it's it is a beautiful building and well worth saving. So, I'm excited to find

something that wants to want wants to utilize this great structure. Parking, it's always a nemesis, isn't it? You said something about Did you say seven commercial units within the building?

Yeah. Up to seven. Okay. Is that included in the calculation or or what's your uh this calculation is what's there now. Okay. Okay. So, I'm saying to you that if we have 70 units total, I'd be asking for a waiver of the parking requirement. Um so that that's where I'm coming from, but the analysis put forth is what's there now? Um 15,000 square feet of floor and then the occupants that are currently there.

What has been done at this point towards finding those parking spaces? Be it 70 75 80 parking spaces. Um where where is the project with that? Uh currently we haven't gotten very far with that because obviously it's contingent upon this to a degree. So, uh, we've spoken, uh, to city officials relative to parking, uh, in and around the area, as well as the Pearl Street garage, which is always empty. I've driven by, I

mean, it's not always full. I've driven by so many times, different times a day, different times a week. Um, there's plenty of parking there that's underutilized and it's literally right behind the building. Depends what's going on at the courthouse on any given day. So, Sure.

Um the first floor residential units, tell me where on the first floor those would be. I have immediately on She has a nice board.

Do you want to see first floor exclusively? Yeah, that'd be great.

Guess it should hold it up. You want to just put on the table? It was falling down.

Anyway, is this is this fine for you to see?

Try it again. Okay. It's a little lighter this time.

Um, so the commercial units would be um exactly where they are, some of them right now, right here and right here.

This would be the first floor like in front of the windows. And then um because of the layout, so this this side this is main street right here. This side of the building abuts another building. So we lose windows on that whole side of the first floor. So, we've laid this out to, you know, to be as functional as we can. Um, and then the rest of them I can show you. These would

all be residential. This would be the main entrance. Ample common space. Some more residential right here. And then I can show you the basement layout if you want. Um, we said up to five. They'd be tiny suites probably like Oh, really?

They'd be they'd be they'd be smaller downstairs. Don't they have as the building goes towards the back?

There is an elevation drop. Yes. It's almost like a garden level or wall basement type of a scenario. There are windows and like 12t ceilings in the in the basement. 12t ceilings. Um No, there. No, I love it. It's It's And so we're going to put um so basically we have a couple units right here and then this would all be allocated uh to a great gym and then the rest commercial

right here. Um and we're going to, you know, work with existing people. see if we can if they want to come downstairs.

Um, we'd build out their space. We'd move them at night. So, and then give them a cheaper rate since it's obviously basement space. Um, we'd love to keep whoever wants to stay. Um, and then there's actually a subb where utilities used to be. They're not there anymore.

And that's where we're going to put the spa. Okay. Downstairs is a is a great amenity. So, when you reference spa, that's a building amenity. Yeah. not a commercial user. So, we need to be clear because we don't have these plans. Okay.

Um Oh, they're in the presentation, right? But they weren't they weren't part of the submission. Okay. When we got them. So, Sure. Um cuz I I would have a question is what is the total square footage of commercial space that would be tenant driven and not an amenity?

The total Hold on. You're saying seven commercial units? Yes. How many square feet of commercial space would that entail? The two upstairs would be a little under 2,000 square ft total. And then down here, the allocation without me playing with it is uh a little bit under 4,000 ft. Maybe 3500 3550. Okay. But is that commercial or is that is that amenity? That's commercial.

The tan is is true commercial operated by another tenant. Okay. Amenities. We don't have to consider because they don't curiosity. As long as the spa is not open to the public, as long as the gym's not open to the public, right? No, no, I understand, but I want I want the board to understand that. So, amenities should not even be they should be complicate comp contemplated as an

enhancement to the residential use, but I don't want them to feel that there is going to be an impediment to parking because of the amenities.

And my concern regarding residential on the first floor, we're certainly not wanting the residential on the south main street. Yeah. Um, so similar to what we did down the street. Um, we allowed residential on the first floor, but not on the south main street end of the building for a certain distance back. And I think we should be consistent with that. I I don't think there should be windows to residential units

accessible from view from walking down the street in both directions in both directions.

Um but what I'd like to make sure that the board understands the relief here um and the different votes that need to take place. So one the only variance comes to residential use on the first floor of the building. So it doesn't stipulate only a section of the first floors. So that's what we did down the street was you granted the variance with the condition that there were no residential

units fronting on South Main. The rear of the building and the remainder of the first floor was allowed to be residential. So you go back 30 ft or two units or whatever it may be on on the floor plan that that street unit has to be commercial. Then once you're into the building, then you could have a resial.

It doesn't say that you can't have residential on the side street. It only says on South Main Street. So we should be true to that portion of the bylaw. So that's the varian section of it.

I I saw in the presentation that it showed uh South Main Street. It does. It shows only units. just shows rental units. Yeah, correct. And that's what I'm I'm offering a year cont.

When we're thinking 70 units, the unit count requires no relief. In the central business district, we're allowed greater than a 20 unit building.

The the relief with regards to the 70 units comes when we're dealing with parking. Correct. And then the other special permit is any use other than what is existing in an existing non-conforming building. Those are the real sections of relief. Um the parking much more entailed and to be reviewed than than the others more so. Um so ask your questions about parking. Um we dealt with the Merell building on

Troy Street where that was a fivetory building or fourstory building. The argument at that time was again the proposed the existing use calculates out to x number of spaces. The proposed use calcul calculates out to x number of spaces and because of the offsetting peaks it was determined at that point of time that it was a wash and that no no additional formal parking needed to be

acquired. I'll call your attention to the to the arts overlays district 86 376E.

Off streetet parking may be provided through one or a combination of the following means on site but not limited between the street and the front of the building offsite by cut by contract and public or private off- streetet parking facilities. Parking may be covered or uncovered. So right now we have x number of spaces and I only read briefly to what attorney Seleno um submitted but I think it's

it's fairly conservative. So we have 173 required spaces for the current activity. There are no secured spaces for this. I think currently a number of the tenants do have space in the Pearl Street garage under contract on a yearly basis.

I would hope that as the city is able to improve the Pro Street garage and it becomes completely open that additional spaces are open. I cautioned the petitioner at the time on Troy Street, a waiver of parking doesn't necessarily make a good business model. So this this is a huge investment and if parking is not available then is going to have a difficult time renting these. Um this is zoning.

You're not making a determination on business model. You're making you're making a determination on existing parking, the impact it has to the neighborhood during the day that it that that those spaces are required now and then the calculation of what's coming and the time of day that that happens.

So your analysis of parking should be based on those two things. Um if this was a new build and like Hotwell Street for instance, right? Hotwell Street required occupant owned land within a certain distance to the building to create new parking because there was no argument that the existing structure requires x amount of spaces.

Merrill was a little bit different.

Third street a little bit different. So you have to take into account what the existing parking demand is and is it a wash in response to what the proposed is. Um the residential part of it. I I honestly think we would be covered easily. I mean, the streets are fairly empty after business hours in that area.

That's a problem the city has. It's a problem we're trying to address. My question is about the square footage of dedicated real commercial space. What is the parking count for those proposed uses is the only concern that I would have. Um, so we have to get a handle, I think, on total square footage of that.

Um, I do think at the end of the day, if we had a proposal or some narrative of what the proposed number is for the commercial uses contemplated, I think that may be something that that we would want as well. Other than that, I have I have no concerns. But with the unknown of if it was going to go all residential, easy to calculate, right?

It's two spaces per and whether you were granted the relief down to one or not.

they would still be covered, right? A 70 unit building would require 140 spaces.

Existing use requires 173. That's a wash. Now, it's just a commercial component of it. So, if this was strictly residential and had a couple of commercial street units, then it's it might be a little bit easier to swallow a wash without requiring secured parking for dedicated spaces. Just something for you to contemplate. I don't know if they if there can be a calculation provided

quickly for what the anticipated parking is. This is existing. Um but the commercial I was hoping to see existing compared to but we don't know we don't know what the commercial spaces are going to be. Right. That's the issue.

Yeah. And trust trust me for me it's my only cons it's my concern with with this application. My only concern with this application is where where's the parking going to go?

Yeah. And so, uh, to that point, the intent would be to gain spaces in the Pearl Street garage. Currently, there are the occupants of this building, there are 28 parking passes for the Pearl Street garage. Um, and so we've looked at that data based on the current landlord. Um, so the intent would be to allow or to gain parking in the garage should it be required as a condition of

the grant through an RFP or otherwise.

Okay. So, right now there's how many?

28. 28. Yes. Okay. Um, so again, the residential use because of the offending peaks, not a big deal. You could contemplate a condition because right now the entire building is commercial and they're operating on 28 spaces during the day. Yeah. Um, so if you wanted to carry it forward that they need to maintain 28 spaces secured, that might be a way of addressing the unknown of the commercial tenants that might be

coming in. Commercial tenants have to comply with the zoning bylaw, whatever it is. What's the argument of the building currently though? That that that I do not know. So what's in there currently? Yes. Oh, that's that's on this on this paper. Yep.

Okay. Because currently it's currently it's three floors of of business. I mean of office space, right, at 15,000 square feet per floor. There's a coffee shop which is similar to the proposed coffee shop. There's a salon on the first floor. Um so I think these address that number. I think that's where that 173 comes from is a compilation of all the existing uses. Right. So that that's what would be necessary

now to the how if if and but what's happening is obviously that building is not completely occupied right now. That is correct. It is not completely occupied. That's why they're getting in the way with 28 parking spaces right now. Oh, I I don't know. I mean there there are vacancies there. Um I can't tell you the number of employees that walk into that building every day. that that would be but

the existing that the current owner could occupy that building completely to its fullest extent without zoning relief. Correct. Right. Can I'd also add that Mr. Fiola is here. I think he could speak to the occupancy when we get there, but um so I'll reserve on that.

That's okay. I'm interested. Any other questions from Yeah, the the question that was raised on no occupancy or no uh residential units on South Main Street, does that present a problem if that restriction was imposed as as we have in other units? Looks like there's one or two on on South Main Street site, right?

Is that correct? Yeah, there's a there's a few just because of the way that the building um Can we see that again? Yeah, sure. You can just stay where you are. I can just spin it around.

So, right now it would be um that's the purple one and the blue ones commercial. Commercial and then these are residential. The purple is residential. Yes. Oh, okay. I thought that was commercial as well. No, since we have no windows on this side, like the whole way back and then it's half of the second floor that we have no windows. We weren't trying to tamper with the windows. So that's how it laid

out best with preserving u beautiful frontage in the front and then uh opening up commercial suites down below.

Okay. So at least a couple of those units then are actually on North Main Street uh South Main Street. South the purple one portion of purple and that first blue. How many feedback was your restriction? There is not one. It just says it says no residential on the first floor. Period. says for the whole building. No, but the ones that we did before, I I want to say it went halfway

through the building, but the building was different shape. It was entirely different. And this is where that triangular park is. Right. Right on the side. Right here. Be right here. So, here's like South Main right there.

So the units in purple except for is that one unit? That's just one unit.

That's a onebedroom with den. Okay.

So their only window space is on South Main Street. Just for that one unit, not any other units.

I mean that that appears like it would be a better amenity space than a residential unit. I don't think I'd have an issue with an amenity space being at ground level because that's not residential. Well, these are all residential. No, no, I know. I'm saying the purple one specifically. The blue ones, at least the first two I I have an issue with. Um, but then just architecturally, I would

have thought because of the lack of windows that that blue I mean the purple space would be an amenity or a commercial space, but I'm not your architect.

Well, it was more so making the numbers work to put in the luxury finishes and everything that we want to do. Well, you can you can move those units and replace where you're putting commercial somewhere else. We're not we're not want we don't want you to reduce the number of units. Just take them off of the street and put them somewhere else in the building.

Not unit count is not the issue. Could a compromise be?

Make that commercial so it's all three commercial shops, exact same entrances, exact same everything. Make this one a little baby commercial. And from here back, let me do residential. That so that exclusively all of Ma South Main Street frontage is commercial. That's exactly what we're I think I can make that work. I think that would be the preference of this board. Okay. We haven't voted yet, but that's what

you're hearing. So Okay. I think I can make that work. I think that's fair.

Okay, let's uh let's turn to uh public. Anyone here wish to speak in support?

Yes.

Hi. Uh for the record, I'm Ken Fola, the executive vice president of Bristol County Economic Development Corporation, and I'm here to uh support this petition that's here before you. Uh for the record, we are the owners of the property.

a little self- serving. Um, but I do think um a couple things uh are important to uh to consider as this thing as you consider the approval of the project itself. So my office um has owned this building probably since 2000.

Um if you recall it was we purchased the Cherry Web building which had been vacant for a number of years. Um, and it was a an eyes saw along South Main Street and the administration at that time asked us if we would take a look at it uh to see if there was something we could do with it. We went into the building itself and we went into the basement and it was the winter and one

of the walls of the furnace was completely burnt out and there were flames shooting out of the furnace. So, we knew we knew we had to act quickly to save the property. We moved forward. I think we purchased the property for about $270,000.

Uh and the building was in total disarray. Uh it took uh we probably paid close to 300,000 just to remove uh the pigeon droppings that were in the building uh that became toxic waste as a result of the volume of those droppings themselves. We ripped off the old facade that covered that building. If you recall, there used to be a tin facade that had the front of that building totally covered. We

removed that uh facade to uh open up the windows that you currently see there and restored that facade in its original historical fashion. We spent more than $4 million rehabbing that property. Um, we built it in accordance with an anticipated use for education which for the first few years we had UMass Stockman in there, we had BCC in there, we had a lot of education uses of the property essentially going from the

first floor up to the third floor. Uh, so the building itself is built out for classrooms especially on the second and third floor. uh which makes the marketing and reoccupancy of that building is very difficult in this classroom space. We had one HBAC that serviced the second and third level as opposed to having individual units that you would have an offices where they controlled all their temperatures and so

forth and so on. So the building worked exceptionally well when it was used for occupancy uh by educational tenants. Um UMass cut back their occupancy uh probably around 20 2 BCC followed shortly thereafter and we've quite frankly have difficulty in filling the space as was pointed out by Carolyn. There's a lot of commercial space on the market right now that's going un unfilled, right? There's a glut

of commercial space and I don't see that, you know, a rush to fill that space immediately. So now we have a position, we're in a position here where we can sell this building for productive use. Um turn it over to uh for uh market rate residential, maintain the commercial aspects of the building on the first level. Have the the developer will reinvest the money necessary for the improvements to the building. And

those improvements, you know, now will also consist of not only the interior, uh, improvements that'll be necessary for the development of the apartments themselves, but also repointing of the building, uh, which is also something that's the building is in dire need of.

So, as we're moving forward with the repositioning of downtowns, this building, I think, fits within that equation. We maintain the commercial use on low levels. We have residential uses above, maybe some additional commercial uses in the basement. And now you have a very productive building that's going to act as an engine for other sorts of development in the downtown. This is exactly what we're trying to do with

regard to revitalization of the downtown. Bring in people with disposable income that can help frequent shops and restaurants in that area and creating some more synergy among some of these other buildings that may be lacking parking at this time. With regard to the parking, you know, please keep in mind that when we were using it for educational uses, we probably we had day and nighttime classes there. Um, we

easily had, you know, between staff and teachers, um, maintenance people and everything else. Just on the second and third floor, we probably had 150 employees at that time, uh, that were involved in the educational aspects of it. And then when you put in the additional pocket associated with the uses on the first floor which were the restaurant, the um salon and some additional office spaces, clearly there

were more than 200 people employed uh within the first three levels of that building. And then we built out the fourth floor for additional office use.

So collectively, you know, we probably had 225 230 people that were there. Some people utilize the garage for parking.

other people chose to park on street.

Parking is, you know, tight down there at times where in the mornings and in the evenings, you know, where we assume people would be going to work and then coming back to utilize those places as spaces, there's plenty of parking availability. The parking garage has tremendous availability. I park in a parking garage every day. I can tell you even when there's jury duty, the first and half of the second level is

utilized, but the balance of the second level and the third level are fully uh fully vacant and the fourth level, you know, is undergoing some repairs and that'll open up and you'll have some additional parking there. So, I think from a parking perspective, I don't think that's going to be a detriment and I think ultimately, you know, that's going to be a risk that the developer takes in terms of the marketability of

these units. But as you know, we've indicated before and as this board has approved before, you know, with the Melo building as well as 285 299 South Main Street, we address those parking issues and I think the same sort of relief is is permanent here. As an interesting side note, I know that we mentioned a narrow building before that has no dedicated off street parking. In speaking with the developer today, uh

close to 20% of those units are now pre-leased even without the parking.

Okay. So people are going to find places to park. People are going to uh utilize whatever parking availability is there whether it's on street or in garages or elsewhere. But I don't think we can throw away an opportunity here to have a significant investment in the downtown that lacks such investment today and needs this insertion of private capital to really rehab this historic building

and turn it into the gym it is. This building's overund years old. The flooring in this building is is tremendous. We refurbished the entire, you know, the entire uh hardwood floor in there, the ceiling heights, the tin ceilings. You just have a workmanship that you can never replicate today. and the rehab of this building in accordance with the plans that are being presented to you tonight. I think takes advantage

of those historical aspects capitalizes upon them and this is going to be a very unique residential offering to residents for greater photo. So I'm hoping that the board sees fit to approve this project. Um, it's something that is dramatically and drastically needed in the downtown and this is an opportunity to start to create a revitalization in a South Main Street Carter. So, with that,

I'll yield, I guess. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else wishing to speak um as a proponent of this uh this project?

Sir, hello. Alexander Silva, 148 Purchase Street, president of the board of directors of the president preservation society of Fall River. Uh the Preservation Society of Fall River is supportive of converting the upper floors of the property to mix residential use. Uh but we oppose the uh any conversion of the front and ground floor of the historic 1916 Cherry Webb property at 139 South Main Street into

residential use. We believe such a change would have a large negative impact on the future of the downtown economic corridor and any hopes to increase commercial activity there. Just this week, the Herald News published an article on making South Main Street an active business corridor with the Farber Community Development Agency stating that the area is listed with the state as a transformative development

initiative with mass development even committing one of its fellows to work with local businesses and property owners. Adding mixeduse residential to this area while maintaining the front-end commercial use spaces would be a great benefit to this corridor. The recently completed renovation project at the Jerry Lawton Plaza directly next door to the property was specifically embarked upon to help reinvigorate this

uh particular section of South Main Street. We believe the city should ensure that the front and ground floor remain in commercial use um to be accentuated by the added residential use and help set the stage for the down for an active downtown Far River that far residents want to see. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. You um in listening to our discussion, we we are concerned about what's facing South Maine and not

wanting to see that as as residential either. So that seems to be very much in uh in line with what preservation is talking about and we appreciate that input. Anyone else in favor?

Is there anyone here wishing to speak in opposition?

There are none.

So we have beautiful opportunity to save the beautiful historical building. Um, we have a willingness on the part of the applicant to deal with that South Main Street facing residential property which I think was a concern my feeling for for all of us right from your department right through the board. Um, as well as that opposition went further than our discussion. It it went into no units on

the first floor. We had we had discussed that. Yeah.

Well, no, we not discussed it, but you know, I mean I just and I had a conversation. Any reaction from the Yeah, we want units on the first floor, but my client is certainly willing to yield and uh you know, the the first blue unit just to Yeah. So, she's willing to take that out as a residential unit and the purple unit would be a commercial unit. So there would be no commercial there would be no

residential space facing South Main Street at all. What's the elevation of the windows on those other four residential spaces that were front on the park?

Can they Well, that no on the Jerry Law side they're going to be adding windows.

Okay. I just want to know what the height of those windows are. Will they be up or will they be at if I'm standing in Jerry Lton Plaza? Can I look into their apartment? No. They're going to be up. They'll be higher.

I think topographically that's would probably happen anyway. I think that changes there anyway. Right. No, no, there is that's similar to what you have on Anan Street, right? Walk down. You can't look into those windows. They're above.

Even I can't look into Mr. Fiola, can you talk a little bit more about the parking garage, Pearl Street? Um I know you mentioned that the fourth level is being repaired or Yeah, I I can talk I can tell you what I know, right? So what I know is that um the city itself is going through some uh repairs to Pearl Street. Um if you go there now, there's sections of the

garage that's been sectioned off for such repairs. Um ultimately they understand that uh they have to make that investment in those parking garages because those parking garages service the bunch of different uses. Everything from courthouse use to office space and potentially you also have parking some parking from west in that parking garage itself as well as u people that are you know primarily uh coming into the

downtown. So I think the city is making a reinvestment in both parking garages both the Pearl Street parking garage as well as the third street parking garage.

Um both uh if you look at Pearl Street there's also a very large flat area that office parking that the if you look at the garage and you look at the Milicanin Boulevard side of that garage, there's probably I would say I would guess there's probably I don't know I'm bad bad at guessing, but I'd probably say there's 50 to 100 car uh spaces there uh that are totally unoccupied. They're not covered, but

that from the garage to um to Milican Boulevard. So I think the cities recognize that parking is an important component to this area and now they're making the investments there and they also realize that parking is a revenue generator for you know I think parking when people jurors come in I believe they're paying close to $20 per day if not more to park there and so it's become it's become a revenue generator

that they can use to put those revenues back into the garages for improvement purposes. Mr. Chairman, I can offer, you know, I've been involved with with the park and garage situation, not directly, but indirectly. Um, we did an extensive downtown parking analysis study, um, done through an outside consultant and the revitalization of downtown hinges solely on getting these garages back

completely open. There are currently 287 spaces between the two garages unavailable. Um so I can offer that there are still there are hundreds available but 287 closed right now. Mhm.

Um I can offer that the administration with over the last year um has acknowledged that deficiency and is have acquired the services of many different types of engineers, structural engineers and there are many studies being taken place and what repairs need to be made but there is a commitment um by the city to get these garages repaired and opened completely. Um we had a budget hearing

when traffic falls under my department as well through planning and engineering. Um they couldn't believe the revenue generator that the traffic department is both through kiosks and the garages. Um so in an environment where you're looking for revenue, one it's easy revenue, right? Fix the parking space and it's instant revenue.

It's already there. um and then that additional parking and what that'll allow us to happen in the downtown. Look at the revenue generated that that would create. So beyond zoning, beyond my role sitting here, I can tell you what that the commitment is from the city and the administration about getting those buildings reconstructed. Um and and there has been a willingness on the part

of the city to do passes to do long-term yeartoear. So in the parking study that we had just done there are a number of recommendations of how parking management should be handled. Um so moving forward there will be great change with how um specific parking areas are designated and acquired for long-term tenants um either through an RFP process where theoretically a tenant could occupy an

entire floor of the garage if if they chose to. though, but that goes out to the public and whatever neighboring business use wants to acquire. And when when when we enter into an RFP like that, that it's a method of creating additional capital to put towards the construction and reconstruction of the garage and the continued maintenance. I've said it and I'm not embarrassed to say it. The city

of Fall River builds beautiful things.

We don't take care of them once we build them. So that there's been great attention over the last year or two to building things that we one we can take care of and two there has to be a plan in place to be able to do that. So I think that's been acknowledged greatly.

Um so yeah my my reason for the question and my concern was whether or not the parking spaces that type of long-term situation falls under 30B and it has to go out for it does if if this building wanted to take an entire floor and set it aside for Yeah, it would have to fall under just just on that point. Um there is precedent for that. Uh when the travelers building was sold

um and to the new owners now, uh the city had put out an RFP to for for the general public to bid upon the owners of the Travelers building bid upon and secured X amount of spaces within those parking garages through an RFP process.

Okay. So there is a very precedent for that and I think moving forward they may we may see something of that in the future taking place again. Appreciate that. Thank you.

What do we think folks? Mr. Mr.

Chairman, I find that that's a extremely beneficial addition to the downtown area and I move that we grant the variance uh conditional upon no residential units being located on the or facing uh South Main Street.

Stop there. Yeah.

one variance one one vote at a time. Is that within the variance or within that's within the variance?

Only variance. Okay.

And it is specifically a variance subject to 86 376 section B.

Right. Second. Do we have a second? Very good. Discussion on that motion on the varants. Just to be clear, you're moving how many units out of there? How many residential? is true as presented. Okay.

As presented. Okay.

Any other discussion then on the variance?

Uh Ricky, yes. Dan, yes. Jim, yes. John, yes. Jim Fer, yes. Thank you.

And next one would be a special that special permit be granted to allow the continuing utilization of non-conforming structure and that this is not more detrimental to the area waving parking requirements. No, two separate separate motions. Two separate.

All right.

Have a second on that as well.

Discussion on that motion. We're clear.

Who was the motion? Was Jim, second was John. Yeah. Okay. And the second second.

Well, we go back to make decisions. I know it was a second second. I want to make sure that sometimes I can't hear when they're listening. Okay. Then uh on the motion, John, yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes. Ricky, yes. Jerry, yes. Thank you.

parking. Just point of clarification. Uh did we actually come to a determination on what we're going to require for parking? No, that's not that's not. So right now without this next vote, they need to come up with all the parking that's required.

So they have a variance. They have a special permit to use the building.

You've done nothing with regards to parking. So if they walk out the door now, they need to come up with 60 parking spaces theoretically. So now we have to deal with the parking in some form or fashion in whatever whatever creative way you all feel comfortable with. There's a lot of moving parts to it because we have to we have to deal with the existing use and the offsetting peaks. Um, however you want to deal with

the parking part of it, that's that's up to you.

I can offer that I am in agreeance with this the submittal by attorney Selenino of currently what would be the parking demand if the building was fully occupied. What would that be? Is that then just going by the second provision here? So 86445 delay parking requirements. So so that's what you need to deal with. So are are we reducing it that they need to come up with some secured parking

somewhere or are you just looking at it's a wash because right now there's 173 and the proposal appears to be less than 173. That's what you need to decide in some combination of of the two.

I think at at a and this is point of discussion. I think at at a minimum we need to do look at something we do whether it's you can't just throw it in the air. whether it's a one to one on the residential which is what we've been um I don't have a problem with with the bedroom mix that they have I don't have a problem one to one on on the res the question is

we we're we're in a situation where the requirement currently where they stay where the full commercial building is 173 parking spaces right again which we're not so my point is that'sing commercial at a minimum residential.

I I would that would be my thought. So you should contemplate a waiver if you want of reduction and then now how do we deal with that number whatever that number is and how that should be addressed. Grant a waiver on the condition that they maintain at least x numbers of secured off street spaces. Yes, but you and you need to decide what that number is. So you can start with a

reduction in the required parking of 1 to one. So now that gets us down to 70 required spaces for residential use.

That leaves So that leaves because current use is 173. What is if we're going to apply a reduction of one to one that means we now for new need 70 for residential that leaves 100 spaces floating around the streets and garages that currently exist to serve the building as it does. You need to determine is that a wash or do they need to come up with some secure parking somewhere in

some form or fashion and then whatever number that is.

It can be in girl street. It can be in a different piece of land. It can be it can be anywhere else. Well, we we we can't assign where that's going to be.

No, that's what you can say within a within a certain proximity to the building like we did in the past. But first, you should come up with a number or or a reduction. If you're not just going to say it's a wash period and weight parking requirements period, now you need to then you need to come up with a number and where it needs to be.

Yeah. I don't think we can do that. I don't think we can do a wash. That's my opinion.

Well, someone can make a motion to whatever whatever they think is appropriate. If you want to make a motion that it's reduction in the residential requirement down to one to one, you can make that one vote. Get that out of the way. And then moving forward now, we're dealing with 70 and the commercial use. And figure out how you're going to deal with that. How many square feet of

commercial? 7,000 7,000 7,000 7,000 at the absolute max potential commercial uses unknown. Well, it's whatever's No, it's it's capped at 7,000 max and I might even turn your 7,000. If I could just offer Mr.

Frank in answering the question, I think uh Mr. Tolman's doing some mad scientist math over here on his pad. And uh correct Jeffrey if we keep 28 parking spaces. Well, if you look at the way Florida calculates the parking is different than other municipalities in the area. So if you take a look at New Bedford, I don't want to look at they require just as a general point, they require

one spot for every 250 gross uh 250 square feet of gross floor area. So if you throw that number into the mix, that 7,000 square feet of commercial area that you're talking about would require 28 spaces, which coincidentally enough is how many the building currently has in Pearl Street. But but let me ask you this. So did you contemplate New Bedford Dotments or anybody else's calculation

in the existing structure and how many spaces the existing structure would require or not require or so we have to compare apples to apples. I understand that we're doing a comparison. So if we have let's keep it to the commercial space but but the zoning is to I mean the calculation needs to be based on our existing zone no one else get so if you want to look at that and come up with a

number of so total total square footage of the building is 15780 times five 60,000 square ft yeah it's 60,000 total well commercial no it's not if you added the two together you got 70 plus $20 if you went that So you're only so so you're taking out 7,000 square ft of commercial tenant space. Yep. That's what you really need to deal with. The rest of it, regardless of how big it is,

it's either 140 spaces, two per unit, or if you reduce it to one to one, 70 spaces. So So that that's a number easy to come up with. Now it's just how do you accommodate that number is what you need to accommodate.

How do we accommodate it? Not us. It's not for us to determine how to accommodate We set the number of spaces.

If she can't accommodate it, she can't get a loan to build the building. No, 100%. No, 100%. So, but that's what you need to determine what number of spaces she needs to have secured within whatever proximity of the building. 100 28 for the commercial, 170 for the residential.

You're asking you're going to require 100 parking spaces.

Do you want to take a break and and maybe put together a proposal of what proposes? We are actually washing parties. Well, no, no, no, but but there's not there's been nothing presented of what the proposed use is going to be. Do you want to you want to table for another couple of hearings to figure out? No, no, no. I don't want to table this. I'm just trying to figure

No, no. Table it to be resolved tonight, but go have a discussion about Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. Let me say this because you're asking them to come up with the numbers for you. No, no, we can come, but I'm just saying come up with the numbers. Come up with the numbers and back them. Yeah, it was come up with the numbers and back them because we're we're looking at the one to one on on residential units, right? And they they've asked for that. So there's

seven. Do we stay up here? So you've got to justify then what you need for your space potentially 100 total. Yes. Yes.

Yes. Like 100 plus. We'd rather hear it right now. We'd rather hear it right now for resial. No. Again, right now for residential you need 140 spaces plus theoretically 28 minutes. So we're going to cut 140 down to 70. So it's 70 plus the 28. 5 minutes. We'll go to the next one. No, we can't. I think that's

uh coming back and the question of parking. So, the applicant proposes to secure 70 spaces uh for the project in total and that's in a garage or a lot within sky not not quy but she'll you take the train you know the best case scenario certainly would be the garage it's the natural fit but she'll commit to a condition of 70 spaces what do you I think that's live livable as far as I

think it's residential and considering what we're talking about the use now is is could be 175 they're actually you know we're looking for half of the potential use so so if that's the case Mr. Chairman, I move that we uh Hang on.

Hold on. So, you can do it two different ways. You don't have to make a reduction to one to one. You can just require flat that for the proposed development 70 secured off streetet parking spaces are required. And if you want to add a distance to that,000 ft 2,000 ft I want to say the last time was 2,000 ft.

You can you can word it that way. So, I know we talked about before about let's reduce it one to one. You can just do it blanket for the proposal for the number of units. Are we still looking at 70 units? We may not be looking at 70 units anymore, right? No, it's still 70. No, it's still it's just reconig those two somewhere else in the building because those where commercial space was is

so the unit count and the 7,000 ft of commercial space. Let's assume that's the same. That's that that's it.

Mr. Chairman, I move that we grant a variance special permit, excuse me, uh conditional upon us the attainment of 70 uh parking spaces within a uh 2,000 foot radius.

We make kids walk at the school. That's right.

Hard to believe.

my I don't think anybody should have to walk this. Do we have a second on that?

Second. That's the school board. Okay.

Is taking the second at the same time taking it. Who wants credit? I did say second, but whoever.

Okay.

You sure guys? I mean, we're keeping score for this. I just want to get it straight. Any discussion on that motion?

They're hearing none. Ricky, yes. Dan, yes. Jim, yes. John, yes. Chairman Drury, yes. Thank you. Thank you so much. We look forward to Thank you so much.

Pretty fair. I want to move.

Thank you. You don't need That's right.

You I would need car to work and I'd be okay. Item number six, our applicant is uh Louis Flores and Landina in floors.

Kira Peter Melino Peter Asel 275 Dickinson Street map D06 lot 39. And the applicant is request is requesting a special permit to allow the following to add a front porch and alter the east side bumpout of the property. The applicant seeks a special permit to allow for the alterations on existing structure and to expand the existing porch purs.

Thank you. For the record, Peter Celino on behalf of the applicant um who owns the property at 275 Dickinson Street. Uh my client is in the in the audience.

She's sitting in the rear in a green uh top. Um relative to the petition in front of you, uh as the chairman read, it is to add the uh front porch and alter the bumpout on the east side of the property. This is being brought as a special permit. Um, realistically speaking, I'm submitting to you that there's really no detriment to pre-existing non-conforming uh structure. Uh, Mr. Hathaway uh opined

that by bumping out that side piece. Um, sorry, not really bumping out, but sort of bringing it closer to the street, if you will. Um, although it didn't encroach on the sideline, that that was an alteration to a pre-existing structure. And then the front porch um is obviously an alteration to the existing structure as well. So I don't think there's any detriment. She's just trying to make her property nicer uh and

more livable. And um I'd be happy to answer any questions. And obviously she's here with her son as well.

I don't really have any questions on this one. Anybody?

I'm going to go straight to the audience. You can think about it.

Anybody here wishing to speak in favor of this petition?

Anybody wishing to speak in opposition to this petition?

Hearing none, unless the board has a question, Mr. Chairman. Yes. I would move that this request is not substantially more detrimental to the neighborhood and that the special permit be approved.

Second. We have a motion and a second.

Any discussion on the motion hearing?

None. John Frank. Yes. Jim, yes. Dan, yes. Ricky, yes. Fur. Yes. Thank you.

You're all set. Thank you. Have a good night. Thank you. On that, just just to be clear, you might want to tell her this. I do see that it's a proposed deal.

Yeah.

And the the summary table says that the building will be less the allowable 35 ft in height. Okay. So, make sure that she doesn't design a building or build one that's greater than 35 ft. That really understood. I don't want to come through with I was I was going to say I've never done one of those variances after the site plan. Well, that's sometimes site plans. That's where we

find Okay, I will email. If we still had phone books, if we still had yellow pages, you would be under specializing in jiu-jitsu. specializing in jiu-jitsu. Uh item number seven, the applicant is Bayate Realy Investments LLC care of Peter Lino uh zero Roth Street map J26 lot 18. The applicant is requesting a variance to allow the following. One to demolish the existing garage space and construct a

residential duplex on the property. The applicant seeks relief from section 86 attachment one with the fall of a zoning ordinance to wave lot area frontage lot coverage and building setback requirements of properties located in A2 apartment zoning district. Thank you for the record. Peter Selenino on behalf of the applicant Bay State uh realy investments and these gentlemen are here

to my left. Christopher Hubert Jason Der are the members and managers of the uh LLC. the this property sits at the end of the Dead End Street, Ross Street. It abuts uh city-owned land. There's currently uh sort of a garage out building on the property. My clients are looking to revitalize it. Um obviously, most of life is timing. So, this is in the A2 district and we filed this I think two days before the A2 district

changed. Um so, I'll argue it in two ways. So, first it's a variance number one. Um I think the existing structure as well as the shape of the lot are my variance hardship arguments. Um but then I'd also highlight that now if we look at it in the current A2 um we would be compliant with frontage. We would be uh still not compliant with lot area but we'd only be about 700 ft short. Um so

this proposal would require my clients to bring a water line down the street.

We're proposing two off- streetet parking spaces per unit uh with the decks in the rear. So, uh as we indicated, the uh waiverss at at the time it was petitioned would be lot area, frontage coverage and setback requirements. Um the frontage would be alleviated if you're looking at it under the current uh standard and we got significantly better on the overall lot area. Um the 10-ft setback and the

current A2 is still not met on the sides. um but be happy to answer any any questions or uh any issues and the gentlemen are here um to talk about conditions if any I would opine that we have to go under the code that exists currently correct not not the application so okay that's favorable this very the very favorable A2 zoning that was reduced to allow development in these zoning districts so

I'll offer first that this is under the new bylaw. This is a completely conforming parcel of land for a single family home. Single could be a single family home with an APU.

Um but something to contemplate.

That's my only concerns. still need right now you still need relief for sideyard setback which we reduced from whatever it was 20 down now to 10 lot area this would have required 12,000 square ft now require 6500 ft for two um lot coverage did not change so the percentage is a percentage council which three bedroom or three bedrooms each

And what do we have? We have single family homes around you everywhere.

Yeah.

On that street there's only three single families and there's three single families. But but you're adjacent to you family. This one adjacent to that is single. Across the street is a signal.

So this quiet little dead end. There's three single family homes right now.

Yeah.

Plenty of parking.

But you still have two off street parking per minute, are you? Yes. Yeah.

The proposal is no no relief required for parking, right? Um, so would you consider a one family with an ADU? certainly wouldn't be a threebedroom ADU, but with the cost to like bring the sewer and water down there, it' really be feasible for like a three unit uh you know, threebedroom, two units. Um just because of like you're coming down like 200 ft that we have to cut open and run new water lines and

that's why there's only been a garage there all this time. Yeah, that's why we're trying to get the two because it offsets a lot of that road cost.

And there's plenty of room down there.

Plenty of room down there. It's really filling up the lot. So questions. Anybody?

Come on. It's a brand new by

Let's try this. Is there anybody in the room tonight that wishes to speak in support?

Anybody wishing to speak in opposition?

Everybody's gone. Everybody's gone.

Did you entertain a motion, Mr.

at this time.

I mean, I I'm just going to say this. We we did reduce the sidelines in the A2 district down from 20 to 10 and we're wouldn't be granting relief in the right. So, it's 6 and 1/2 ft on either side here.

That's all I'm going to say. Make a motion. Okay. So, I I make a motion that the variance be granted as Second motion and second discussion on the motion before I call it.

John Frank want to make sure the uh we got abandoned chicken coupe and those are all going right. Yes. Yes. All structures will be demolished.

Thank you. He's Portuguese, but not that Portuguese.

Egg prices are coming down a little bit.

So, I don't know when you're going to need the motion. Yes.

Jim Cawkins. Yes. Damn.

Thinking no.

Are you thinking no? Are you saying no?

No. Ricky, yes. Chairman Pereira, no

one.

You need a super majority for It's been a while since I've done this.

Just learning something new every time.

Item number eight, applicant is Lucas Nunoto Kro Jeffrey P. Tolman, 1179 South Street, map G23, lot 20 after the fact filing.

Miss Peter, uh, the applicant is requesting a variance to allow the following. The petitioner proposes to make a finished Apartment located in the basement of 96 Main Street, a large apartment, a legal apartment bringing the total number of residential apartment units in the building from 2 to three. The petitioner proposes to wave the requirement for off- streetet parking properties located in R4 two family

zoning district. Good evening. For the record, my name is Jeff Tolman from Northeast Engineers and Consultants.

Here with me tonight is Lucas Kudo, the petitioner uh for this application. As you would stated, the property is located at 1179 South Main Street, uh which is on the west side of South Main Street, about 75 ft south of Freedom Street. Uh the lot is G23, map G23, lot 20. It is located in the two family R4 zoning district. Um the the property was purchased by the petitioner back in January of 2025 of this year.

Upon purchasing the property, um Mr. Kudo learned that the the apartment in the basement, which he was told was a usable apartment, um was not a legal apartment. And he was told that by uh Inspector Frank Hario, who happened to stop by the property and spoke to Mr.

Kudo. Um, apparently Frank had been dealing with the the previous owners of the property to try to rectify um the issue in the basement. Um, but before they rectified the issues, uh, they sold the property to Mr. Kudo. Um, so, you know, we fully understand the property is listed as a two family uh, based on city records and that the apartment in the basement uh, is not a legal conforming apartment, which uh, brings

us here tonight. Um, so as soon as Mr.

Kudo uh was was informed of that. He was uh took the necessary actions to um correct some of the issues that were outstanding um that Mr. was speaking to the the previous owners about and those building issues, not necessarily to make this a legal apartment, but just um building code related items um such as the electrical uh the wiring within the apartment. And I think there was also a

permit that was pulled um to rectify or or to address the second means of access. Uh so Mr. Kudo applied for the permits and obtained the permits and made uh any necessary upgrades uh based on the work that was previously done by the owner to get this thing to a point um where we could come here tonight and petition uh the board to make this a legal uh unit. Um I should mention that

Mr. Zakudo is a a recently retired Army veteran. Um he has family in the area.

Uh this is the first home that he's purchased, so he's not all that familiar with the with the process and and what to look out for. So um he did fall victim um to listening to uh you know the the seller of the property and and what could be done with it. Um so he's here tonight to try to make this a legal apartment in in the basement. It is, I should mention, it's a one-bedroom

apartment setup down there. Um, as you can see on the plan, there is no um real no space on the property for any additional off- streetet parking that could be added. Um, I should note there is an attached two stall garage on the south side of of the two family dwelling. Um, that Mr. Kudo doesn't currently use uh, you know, for parking purposes. He uses it for storage. uh he's more than uh uh acceptable

obviously to uh cleaning that out and making that available for himself who lives on he lives on the first floor um of the building which is a two-bedroom unit and there's also a two-bedroom unit on the second floor. Um so again, we're here tonight to try to uh permit the the basement as a onebedroom uh apartment waving parking requirements. So, how many square feet is that that apartment? Do you have you

know how many square feet that is? I'm bad in guessing, but could be less than 800 ft. 900 ft.

Would you say between 8 and 9? Like in that range? Yeah. Yeah.

8 or 900 square feet.

Too big to be an ADU.

It was an ADU, you wouldn't be sitting here right now. Did did you attempt to deal with the building inspector to have it be acknowledged as an accessory dwelling unit? You probably don't understand it, but in February of this year, the governor instituted Massachusetts general law that allows for the establishment of what is called an accessory dwelling unit, a small apartment unit like this, whether it be

attached in the existing building, an attic, a basement, in a garage that you can convert space into a unit without needing zoning relief. And that's allowed to happen in a district that allows for single family home construction, which this this zoning district does. So if if the unit, but there are size requirements, so you can't exceed 900 square f feet. So that's that's an important number to

know. So my suggestion is I would table the matter, see if you can get it to be considered as an accessory dwelling unit because you will have a better chance of that happening. Then if you can't meet it because maybe it's two square feet too big, then you would need zoning relief. But you technically may not need zoning relief now. So one, I wouldn't want you to be denied.

But I can't tell you to table the matter, but you may want to table it.

Discuss it with Glenn Hath, the building code enforcement officer. Yes. And see if he can make the determination that this can be considered in ADU. Its entrances, its exits, is it a separate entrance? you know, it's a very simple little set of rules which is happening everywhere in the city. So that may allow this to happen immediately and not need zoning relief.

So zoning relief is a lastditch effort.

Um so if you don't need to be here then you shouldn't be here. So hopefully maybe you can get the I'm sorry. Um the unit feeds under the means of igris. It has two exits. Um one to the backyard and another one to the front of the South Main Street. Okay. Um it I don't think it has more being honest. It has more than 800 square feet because it's actually just a bedroom and a keychain

in a bedroom. So deal with the building inspector. So even in that 900 square ft there are certain areas that are excluded in that calculation. So, if you have a little floor plan and the size of the rooms and Jeff can draw that for you and you can make the determination that you qualify as an ADU, then you don't need to be here. The building inspector or the building department should have

advised you of that. I don't know when this first started. Maybe it started before this regulation came into play.

So, they're not going to call you back and say, "Hey, remember this, but you don't have to." But, so maybe you don't have to be here. Yeah, I believe it was started immediately right back in January. And he's been dealing with the building department since. rectifying some of the issues whether it would be Frank and he has that dealings with Clint. So we can we can certainly Would

you want to table? We will wave tableing fee as the board so yeah that all the sense in the world we would uh request that the board table us so that we can explore the possibility of making this an ADU and and I will bring up you do have a letter of opposition from one of your neighbors that owns three properties. Okay. I don't know if he's spoken to you or not.

Gentleman's name is um Jose Amarall.

He's a trustee of the J&J Amaral Family Trust. They own properties at 1182, 1184 and 1192 South Main Street. So they were across the street from you and they are in opposition to this. Okay. No, I never spoke with them.

So that doesn't mean we would say no just based upon this, but you do have neighborhood opposition. This will be part of the record without being read in. Mr. Chair, your only question.

So on this, you're asking for waiver on parking. Yes. But it says there's two parking spaces in the ground. Correct.

Well, we would need we would still uh there's two two unit for an ADU if it's within a half a mile of train station.

So figure out that distance. So maybe the only relief you need is if you need it was it's in the note. So was it going to be offered for the uh No, there's no no ability u to provide any additional other than cleaning out the garage, getting vehicles in there for for the uh for the owner to use. Uh getting two vehicles off the street, putting them in uh you know to

compensate for the the addition parking.

Right now there is no off streetet parking because the garage is Well, there's two but there technically there's two. We can't say there aren't anybody's not using them. So realistically there would be spaces on your lot and put a gate across it. But at least you comply with zoning. You have to have it. You don't have to allow people to use but let's see if we don't have to have you here.

Mr. Chairman move that we grant an extension until next month. Yes. Then wave the fill motion. Was there a second? Second motion and second on the motion. Ricky.

Yes. Dan, yes. Jim, John, chairman Py.

Yes.

Good. I just got to fill this out in approve of minutes.

I move waving with the reading of the minutes and approve the secretaries.

Motion and second on the minutes. All in favor? I that us motion to motion. Motion was made by motion John.

All in favor.

Thank you, Mike.

Dan, when is it July?