Fall River ZBA denies request for commercial dog kennel after owners and neighbors testify about deaths and licensing concerns

The Zoning Board of Appeals voted Feb. 19 to deny a variance/special permit for a commercial dog kennel at 1089 Wilson Road after the hearing revealed licensing problems and distressing accounts from pet owners.

Attorney Peter Salino said the operation had run for about three years and had been shut down by city enforcement; his client, James J. Borden Jr., asked the board for approval to reopen (the applicant’s counsel characterized the request as seeking after-the-fact zoning relief for an existing operation). Supporters — several clients who had used the business for daycare and boarding — told the board they valued the care and flexibility the facility had provided.

Opponents presented sharply different evidence. Multiple speakers said two dogs boarded at the facility died after apparent, highly contagious respiratory illness and alleged the facility had not appropriately notified owners, had operated without the proper boarding license and had been over capacity. One speaker said, “We have lost two beloved dogs because of the situation,” and other witnesses described veterinary records and interactions with animal-control that led enforcement to intervene. The applicant acknowledged there had been illnesses and apologized to affected owners, and stated he would comply with animal-control directions going forward.

Board members focused on the legal standards for a use variance in a single-family zoning district, questions of licensure and oversight, and whether the application sought relief only for daytime daycare (6 a.m.–6 p.m.) or for overnight boarding as well. The applicant told the board he would not continue overnight boarding, but animal-control testimony in the hearing record and owners’ accounts raised the board’s concern about prior unlicensed boarding and biosecurity practices.

A motion to deny the application was moved and seconded; the roll call resulted in a majority vote to deny the variance/special permit. The board’s denial reflects the weight the panel gave to public-safety, licensing and statutory-hardship arguments presented during the hearing. The denial does not grant the applicant the right to operate; the applicant would need to address licensing, animal-control, and any building-department conditions and may reapply if he can meet the statutory requirements.