The proposal for the childcare facility on Rock Street, represented by attorney David Asad, sparked considerable discussion among board members and local residents. The facility aimed to waive existing parking requirements and erect a sign, with the justification that the site was entitled to certain exemptions under Massachusetts law. Asad argued that the childcare center would provide a public benefit, emphasizing the availability of on-street parking and the need for parking relief in anticipation of future expansions. However, the proposal faced opposition from residents who expressed concerns about traffic congestion, noise, and the preservation of the historic neighborhood.

Carol Brown, a property owner adjacent to the site, voiced her worries about increased traffic and noise disturbances, particularly given the potential early morning arrivals of staff and children. She contrasted the proposed daycare’s impact with that of the previous orthodontic practice, which had minimal effect on neighborhood traffic. Brown and other residents argued that the introduction of the daycare would undermine the historical integrity of the area and lead to further congestion, especially with the recent approval of a new apartment complex nearby.

Alexander Silva, representing the Preservation Society of Fall River, also opposed the permit, stressing that the property lies within the city’s only protected historic district. Silva highlighted that the lack of off-street parking would exacerbate traffic issues and pose safety risks, emphasizing the potential for irreversible changes to the neighborhood’s character. Attorney Dane Ardente, representing another resident, argued that the request should be classified as a dimensional variance rather than a special permit, asserting that the town retains authority over parking regulations despite the site’s educational use.

Board members deliberated on the procedural aspects of the proposal, highlighting the need for a definitive stance from the building inspector to ensure any decision made was legally sound and not subject to appeal. A procedural oversight regarding the building inspector’s letter led to the board’s decision to table the application, opting to seek further clarification before proceeding.

The board’s agenda also included an application from Little Hands College Incorporated, which sought similar parking and signage exemptions for a facility on Rock Street. The discussion mirrored concerns raised about the daycare proposal, focusing on parking requirements, traffic flow, and the impact on the local community. Despite some disagreements regarding the interpretation of zoning laws, the board ultimately approved the application for Little Hands College, contingent on conditions similar to those imposed on previous approvals.

Another topic of discussion was the proposal from the Veterans Association of Bristol County, which sought a variance to convert a portion of an existing commercial building into a food pantry and commercial kitchen for job training. The board reviewed concerns about parking and traffic, with the property’s proximity to a school being a focal point. Despite some resident concerns, the proposal received support from local officials and community members, emphasizing the potential benefits for veterans and the broader community.

The board also addressed several other applications, including one from Dylan’s Estates LLC, which involved adding apartment units to an existing dwelling on Hanover Street. The board approved the proposal, granting variances for unit count and parking requirements, with the condition that stormwater management practices be implemented to address runoff and potential parking issues.