Fall River ZBA tables Little Hands College child-care request after neighbors and staff raise parking, historic-district concerns

The Zoning Board of Appeals of the City of Fall River on Sept. 18 tabled a special-permit application from Little Hands College Inc. to operate a child-care facility at 551 Rock Street, citing outstanding questions about parking requirements and a building-inspector determination. The board voted to delay action while it requests clarification from the building inspector about a Sept. 16 letter regarding change-of-use parking requirements.

Why it matters: The proposal would convert a former orthodontic/professional office location into an early-education center in a part of the city located inside Fall River’s 40C historic district. Neighbors and the preservation group told the board they expect more traffic, noise and on-street parking demand than the prior office use, and they urged denial or tighter limits.

Attorney David Assett, representing Little Hands College, said the applicant is a licensed early-education provider and invoked state law protecting educational uses, including the Dover Amendment. “The applicant is a duly licensed Massachusetts early education care facility, and as such is entitled to all the benefits of Massachusetts General Law chapter 48 section 3, third paragraph, the Dover Amendment,” Assett told the board while arguing the board can still regulate parking and signage by special permit. Assett described the maximum physical capacity of the building as up to 19 staff members and (depending on the licensing outcome) as many as 65–68 children, and told the board he used the maximum to calculate parking needs.

Residents pushed back. Carol Brown, who owns an adjacent property, told the board the change would convert “a professional use with 5 employees to a childcare with capacity for 19 employees and 15, perhaps up to 68 children, concurrently,” and that the block lacks off-street drop-off and loading space. Alexander Silva of the Preservation Society of Fall River called the proposed use “extremely detrimental to the historic character of the neighborhood.”

Board staff and members flagged the Sept. 16 letter from the building commissioner, Glenn Hathaway, which the applicant had requested; Director of Engineering and Planning Daniel Aguiar said the board should not act while the letter’s scope remains unclear. “I would advise that the board not act on something where the zoning enforcement official has determined whether inadequately or not, but supplied a letter saying that the applicant doesn’t need to be here,” Aguiar said. He recommended the board ask Hathaway for clearer, code-based guidance before a decision so any action would not be vulnerable to appeal.

What the board did: The board voted to table the matter and directed staff to request clarification from the building inspector on the September 16 determination. The motion to table passed with affirmative votes from all five members present.

Next steps: The applicant said it will pursue other required reviews, including state licensing with the Department of Early Education and Care and review by the Historic District Commission for signage. The ZBA will reconsider the application after receiving a clarified letter from the building inspector and after the applicant completes any requested filings.