Fall River ZBA approves subdivision at 102 Mison Street with parking condition

2123823 · January 17, 2025

Get AI-powered insights, summaries, and transcripts

Subscribe
AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

The Fall River Zoning Board of Appeals approved a variance to allow subdivision of 102 Mison Street into three lots, with a condition requiring off-street parking for the existing dwelling.

The Fall River Zoning Board of Appeals on Jan. 16, 2025, approved a variance allowing the owner of 102 Mison Street to divide the parcel into three lots, subject to a condition requiring four off-street parking spaces for the existing dwelling on Lot 1.

The petitioner, Tatchell Real Estate LLC, represented by attorney Peter A. Salino, sought relief from Fall River Zoning Ordinance Chapter 86 (Attachment 1) for lot-area, rear-yard setback (for Lot 2), and lot-coverage requirements in an R4 two-family zoning district. Salino told the board the revised plan responds to neighborhood input from prior hearings and would leave the existing two-family dwelling on Lot 1 and build single-family dwellings on Lots 2 and 3.

Dan Agge, director of engineering and planning, noted the relief sought was limited to lot coverage and the single rear-yard waiver; frontage, total lot area, front yard, and side-yard requirements were not being waived. Planning staff asked that the applicant show or guarantee four off-street parking spaces at 102 Mison Street; the board adopted a parking condition in its approval.

The board voted unanimously in favor. The motion to approve included the condition that Lot 1 provide four off-street parking spaces; the motion was seconded and carried with votes recorded as: Eric Kelly — yes; Dan DuPere — yes; James Calkins — yes; Alexis — yes; Chairman Ferrera — yes.

The board limited public comment during the item (no members of the public spoke in opposition or support at the hearing). The board noted the item had been tabled from the Dec. 19, 2024 meeting and that neighborhood concerns raised at earlier hearings informed the revised plan.