Planning Board

City of Lowell - Planning Board Planning Board Meeting Minutes Monday, March 4, 2024 6:30 p.m. City Council Chambers, 2nd Floor, City Hall City of Lowell, 375 Merrimack Street, Lowell, MA Remote Participation Optional via Zoom Note: These minutes are not completed verbatim. For a recording of the meeting, visit www.ltc.org Members Present Chairman Linnehan Vice Chair Frechette Member Lockhart Member Cheng Member Tenczar Members Absent Member Dolan-Wilson Others Present Dylan Ricker, Associate Planner A quorum of the Board was present. Chairman Linnehan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM. I. Minutes for Approval 2/22/2024 meeting minutes G. Frechette motioned, and C. Cheng seconded the motion to approve the February 22, 2024 meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). II. Continued Business III. New Business Site Plan Review and Special Permit: 55, 75, and 77 Phoenix Avenue, 01852 Phoenix Ave Realty, LLC has applied to the Lowell Planning Board seeking to demolish the existing structures and construct 3 manufacturing garages totaling 53,439 square feet along with parking, landscaping, and drainage work. The subject property is located in the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The proposed work requires Site Plan Review approval from the Planning Board per Section 11.4 for the construction of non-residential buildings greater than 10,000 square feet, Special Permit approval from the Planning Board per Section 5.2.3 for construction near wetlands, and Special Permit approval per Section 6.1.10 to increase the maximum curb cut. On Behalf: John Geary, Applicant’s Representative J. Geary explained the proposal. J. Geary said there is a significant amount of wetland on-site. J. Geary explained the current conditions of the site. J. Geary said the primary use is as storage for industrial equipment. J. Geary said the engineering team is working with the City stormwater team and they are confident they will meet or exceed the city stormwater requirements. J. Geary said the proposal does not require Variance relief, and said they have obtained Conservation Commission approval. J. Geary said they intend to complete the work in phases with a timeline of roughly 3 years. J. Geary addressed DPD staff comments including comments from the Transportation Engineer and Chief Design Planner. Jim Hanley, Applicant’s Engineer J. Hanley explained the current conditions of the site. J. Hanley explained the proximity to the wetland, and said the work will not impact the wetland or floodplain on site. J. Hanley said there is currently no stormwater management on the site and they are proposing a stormwater management system. J. Hanley explained the phases of development and proposed site layout. J. Hanley said the site is currently hard packed gravel which will be replaced with paving and landscaping. J. Hanley said there will be a slight reduction to impervious surface on the site. J. Hanley said the proposed use is consistent with zoning, and they are amenable to staff comments. Angie Verge, Applicant’s Landscape Designer A. Verge explained the proposed landscape plan and said the goal is to increase the tree canopy and include plantings to benefit the wetland. A. Verge summarized the vegetative buffers between the paved area and wetland. Jack Sullivan, Applicant’s Architect J. Sullivan explained the proposed design. Ed Kirby, Applicant Troy Stearns, Applicant’s Engineer Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: T. Linnehan noted an abutter submitted a letter expressing concerns about the proposed use on the site, and the abutter provided a follow up letter indicating she spoke with applicant’s representative and no longer has concerns with the proposed use. G. Frechette said the proposal is an opportunity to improve the site. G. Frechette said the proposal will be an improvement to the streetscape and site. G. Frechette asked for clarity on the pedestrian circulation of the site. G. Frechette said he is supportive of a restriction that the 2 parallel parking spaces be reserved for employees only. J. Hanley explained the flow for the site, and said the goal is to keep pedestrians and passenger vehicles out of the center courtyard of the site where larger trucks will be. G. Frechette noted the applicant is employing a site professional to ensure soil is managed properly. G. Frechette said he does not have concerns and expressed support. C. Cheng agreed that the work is an improvement to the site, and added there is a significant improvement to the streetscape. C. Cheng asked about the stormwater system. J. Hanley explained the stormwater system, and said stormwater will be filtered to remove sediment from water, J. Hanley added there will be on O&M Plan for the stormwater system. J. Hanley said the goal is to ensure they do not increase stormwater flow from the site. C. Cheng asked about the rear access road behind the rear building. J. Hanley said this is to provide access to the rear of the building in case work needs to be done on the back of the building, and there will be no parking there. C. Cheng asked for clarification on the soil management plan. J. Hanley explained. D. Tenczar said the proposal is an improvement to the site, especially the proposed landscaping plan. D. Tenczar asked about the pedestrian walkways. J. Hanley said the walkway was set up so it would not be in the 50 foot buffer zone of the wetland, and the rear pedestrian access will not have a lot of pedestrian traffic, but they want to provide this in case it is needed. J. Hanley said there is a retaining wall preventing them from moving the walkway further to the side. D. Tenczar clarified the proposed use is industrial storage not manufacturing garages. J. Geary confirmed. D. Tenczar asked if the applicant can provide signage indicating that the rear parking is for employees only. J. Geary said the applicant is amenable to adding this signage. R. Lockhart said the proposal is a great improvement to the site, especially the landscaping. R. Lockhart asked about the engineering comments and asked if the applicant is amenable to complying with these comments. J. Geart said the applicant has no problem complying with the engineering comments as a condition of approval. R. Lockhart asked about the study on potential impacts on Rt 30a and Phoenix Ave. J. Geary said the traffic impacts were reviewed and there was no impact during peak traffic periods and parking was sufficient. T. Linnehan noted that the Fire Department had not issued comments. J. Geary said the applicant has met with the Fire Department early in the process and they had no concerns at the time. J. Geary said Fire has access to 3 sides of the building and said buildings will be sprinklered. T. Linnehan asked where the applicant will dispose of waste materials. J. Geary said there is a dumpster pad area, and confirmed the dumpsters will be screened. T. Linnehan asked about the Chief Design Planner’s comments on soil management. J. Geary said there will be a site professional employed during construction and will provide a soils management plan. T. Linnehan said the applicant addressed his concerns. Motion: G. Frechette motioned to approve the Special Permit with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall restrict the parallel parking spaces for employees only; 2. The applicant shall receive Fire Department approval; 3. The applicant shall employ a licensed site professional to oversee the proper handling of materials and soil throughout the project; 4. The applicant shall obtain stormwater approval from the Lowell Regional Wastewater Utility (LRWWU); and 5. The applicant shall work with DPD for final landscaping approval. D. Tenczar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). T. Linnehan motioned to approve the Site Plan Review with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall restrict the parallel parking spaces for employees only; 2. The applicant shall receive Fire Department approval; 3. The applicant shall employ a licensed site professional to oversee the proper handling of materials and soil throughout the project; 4. The applicant shall obtain stormwater approval from the Lowell Regional Wastewater Utility (LRWWU); and 5. The applicant shall work with DPD for final landscaping approval. C. Cheng seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). Site Plan Review and Special Permit: 408 Suffolk Street and 585 Market Street, 01852 Donik Corp. has applied to the Lowell Planning Board to construct a 33-unit mixed-use development at 408 Suffolk Street & 585 Market Street. The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed-Use (UMU) and Multi-Family Overlay District – Mid-Rise (MFOM) zoning district. The proposal requires Site Plan Review approval per Section 11.4 for a development with greater than 3 residential units, and Special Permit approval from the Planning Board per Article 12.1 for greater than 11 units on one lot. On Behalf: Bill Martin, Applicant’s Representative B. Martin summarized the proposal and said the property is being developed by the same developer as the Acre Crossing development. B. Martin said the project will have affordable homeownership units. B. Martin said the project is not dependent on closing Suffolk Street for a park, and said this work is dependent on MassWorks funding, Russell Tedford, Applicant’s Engineer R. Tedford explained the current conditions of the site. R. Tedford said there will be 6,600 sf of commercial space and 33 residential units upstairs. R. Tedford said they will be replacing the sidewalks along the project limits per Engineering comments. R. Tedford said there is currently no stormwater system on site, and they will be adding an underground infiltration system under the pocket park which the stormwater team has approved of. R. Tedford explained the pocket park. R. Tedford said the revised plans ensure the doors do not swing open into the City right-of-way. Philippe Thibault, Applicant’s Architect P. Thibault explained the proposed floor plans, unit count, and unit sizes. P. Thibault said there will be a central entrance to the retail portion of the building, and the space may be split into multiple suites. P. Thibault said there will be windows looking into the main lobby. P. Thibault said the current plan is to have the Suffolk Street frontage be opaque. P. Thibault explained the design of the building. P. Thibault said there will be Juliet balconies along Market Street and the rear alley. B. Martin said the applicant is open to redesigning to add a glass type material along the Suffolk Street frontage. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: Jeremy Coombs, 432 Suffolk Street J. Coombs said he is concerned with the project’s impact on their yard. J. Coombs expressed concern about losing sunlight. J. Coombs said the area along Suffolk Street has a lot of activity and they are glad the pocket park is on Suffolk Street. J. Coombs expressed concern about stormwater runoff. J. Coombs said there will be many windows overlooking his yard and expressed concern about traffic. Hannah Coombs, 432 Suffolk Street H. Coombs said she would like more info about the alleyway that runs directly behind their property to the pocket park. H. Coombs expressed concern about the darkness of the alleyway attracting negative activity. Discussion: B. Martin said they received the letter today and have not had the opportunity to reach out. B. Martin said it appears the abutters are opposed to every aspect of the project and is not sure what could be done to satisfy their concerns. B. Martin said the project mostly complies with zoning and the project is designed to produce affordable homeownership opportunities in the area. G. Frechette said he likes the design of the building, and the building is an improvement to the site. G. Frechette noted parking is no longer required and said he would like a TDM Plan. G. Frechette asked if the applicant intends to provide bike racks. B. Martin confirmed, and said the items included in the TDM Plan have been taken into account by the applicant but was not articulated in a plan. B. Martin said bike racks will be located on the first floor. G. Frechette said it would be an improvement if there was glass along the Suffolk Street frontage. B. Martin said the community room could be put along Suffolk Street so there is a use that is more conducive to windows. G. Frechette said that change would be an improvement. G. Frechette asked about the pathway between the property and the abutters’ property. B. Martin said there is a setback requirement under zoning and that is why there is a space. G. Frechette asked if a shadow analysis is required under zoning. B. Martin said the applicant applied for a waiver from the requirement. C. Cheng said he believes this is important in this case. G. Frechette expressed support for the park area. G. Frechette said he is looking for glass on Suffolk Street with the community room being added to the Suffolk Street side of the building, and added he would like to see a TDM Plan. C. Cheng agreed that a TDM plan would be beneficial. C. Cheng said a shadow analysis is important and this is not a good case for a waiver due to the abutter concerns. C. Cheng expressed concern about the rear alleyway and said added transparency along Suffolk Street is beneficial since this will put more eyes on the street and help deter criminal activities. C. Cheng said the alleyway is concerning because there is no vision into the alleyway. D. Tenczar asked if the units will be for homeownership. B. Martin confirmed this. D. Tenczar asked about the status of the Variances. B. Martin said they will appear before the ZBA next week because the ZBA could not accommodate the application sooner. B. Martin summarized the required Variances. D. Tenczar asked if the applicant wants to see Suffolk Street discontinued. B. Martin said at this point the development cannot support the cost to build a park here, but they are supportive of the City adding a park if they chose to do so, and would work with the City if the City wished to pursue this. D. Tenczar agreed that glass along Suffolk Street would be an improvement. D. Tenczar said he would like to see a TDM Plan and shadow analysis before voting on the application. D. Tenczar said there may be ways to reduce the impact of the development on the abutter, and added that non-reflective windows may be beneficial at the rear of the building. D. Tenczar said the applicant should have a plan for the back alleyway. R. Lockhart said the TDM Plan is a critical component. R. Lockhart asked about trash and recycling for the building. P. Thibault said trash would be brought to the trash room by residents and there would be private pick up. T. Linnehan said he would a shadow analysis, plan for the rear alleyway to make the area safer, shade trees on the lot would be an improvement, and the applicant would need stormwater approval. T. Linnehan said the applicant should submit a TDM Plan. D. Tenczar said the applicant should clarify the direction of stormwater runoff. D. Tenczar said he likes the project, he would just like to see some improvements. B. Martin said the applicant has a plan for the stormwater runoff and they are working with the city stormwater team. C. Cheng said the applicant should work with DPD and seek input from the Police Department on ways to improve the design of the alleyway together with the parklet to deter crime and undesirable activity in these spaces, and the applicant should solicit and consider abutters’ input when does the shadow analysis. B. Martin requested a continuance to the 3/18 Planning Board meeting. Motion: D. Tenczar motioned, and R. Lockhart seconded the motion to continue the application to the March 18, 2024 Planning Board meeting. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). Site Plan Review and Special Permit: 81 School Street, 01854 Kenneth and Melissa Lania have applied to the Lowell Planning Board seeking to construct three townhouse style residential units at 81 School Street. The property currently contains a single-family home which will remain. The subject property is located in the Traditional Multi-Family (TMF) zoning district. The proposal requires Site Plan Review approval per Section 11.4 for a property with greater than 3 residential units, and Special Permit approval per Article 12.1 and Section 11.3 for a property with 4 residential units. On Behalf: Kenneth Lania, Applicant K. Lania explained the proposal. K. Lania said the existing garage will be removed and the existing concrete driveway will be removed. K. Lania said they will not be adding additional curb cut, just relocating the existing curb cut. K. Lania said the driveway will go to the rear of the parcel to access the additional units. K. Lania said the proposal does not require any Variances, and exceeds the off-street parking requirement. K. Lania said the retaining walls will not be higher than 4 feet. K. Lania said the proposal meets the stormwater requirements, and received approval from the Fire Department and Transportation Engineer. K. Lania said he met with abutters and said there was a concern about the buffer and screening of the backyard. K. Lania said he is amenable to putting up fencing to provide privacy to the abutters. Speaking in Favor: John Tsoumas, 84 School Street J. Tsoumas said he was initially opposed to the project, but after speaking with the engineer he is supportive of the new plans and is satisfied with the current proposal. Walter McGrail, 89 School Street W. McGrail said he initially was not in favor, but the applicant was amenable to the requested changes and he is now in favor. Henry Kucharzyk, 92 School Street H. Kucharzyk said he is supportive of the revised plans and has worked to accommodate abutters, so the development is aesthetically pleasing. Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: K. Lania summarized the history of the project. G. Frechette said he is pleased the project does not require any Variances. G. Frechette noted DPD comments regarding tree plantings. K. Lania said he anticipates planting 4 deciduous trees and additional shrubs. K. Lania said he is amenable to working with DPD on the landscaping plan. G. Frechette asked if the units are condos, K. Lania confirmed they were. G. Frechette asked if the applicant is amenable to providing screening at the rear of the property whether it be landscaping or fencing, K. Lania agreed. G. Frechette noted the applicant received approval from the Transportation Engineer, Fire Department, and stormwater team. C. Cheng said he had no questions, and the plan looks good. C. Cheng thanked the applicant for addressing the abutters’ concerns. D. Tenczar asked about the garbage removal. K. Lania said the new units will have they own barrels and there will be private trash pickup. D. Tenczar said landscaping is important and noted the plan only shows 2 trees. D. Tenczar said he would like 6 trees, K. Lania agreed. R. Lockhart said he is in favor of the project and thanked the applicant for working with abutters. R. Lockhart said this is an area that DCR provides free shade trees, and said the applicant should coordinate with DCR, K. Lania agreed. T. Linnehan expressed support for the 3 unit proposal over the 4 unit proposal. Motion: T. Linnehan motioned to approve the Site Plan Review with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall work with DPD to add 6 trees to the site; 2. The applicant shall screen the rear of the property with vegetation or fencing per DPD approval; 3. The applicant shall remove snow that cannot be stored on-site; and 4. The retaining wall at the front of the property shall not exceed 2.5 feet to ensure a line of site for exiting vehicles per the Transportation Engineer’s comments. D. Tenczar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). T. Linnehan motioned to approve the Special Permit with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall work with DPD to add 6 trees to the site; 2. The applicant shall screen the rear of the property with vegetation or fencing per DPD approval; 3. The applicant shall remove snow that cannot be stored on-site; and 4. The retaining wall at the front of the property shall not exceed 2.5 feet to ensure a line of site for exiting vehicles per the Transportation Engineer’s comments. D. Tenczar seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). IV. Other Business Community Preservation Committee Appointment The Planning Board will appoint a member of the Board to the Community Preservation Committee; the appointment will last for 3 years. T. Linnehan motioned, and C. Cheng seconded the motion to appoint Allison Dolan-Wilson as the Planning Board representative to the Community Preservation Committee. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). V. Further Comments from Planning Board Members G. Frechette provided an update on the Rourke Bridge, and said the project is scheduled to begin in late 2025 with an estimated completion of 2028. G. Frechette said NMCOG will be having an open house for their new office on Suffolk Street. T. Linnehan expressed concern about left turning traffic at Smyth Cannabis. T. Linnehan said a speed bump was installed to prevent left turns, but the customers are still turning left and requested DPD work to address the issue. R. Lockhart said on 2/29 the Historic Board had its 40th anniversary of its first meeting. The next meeting will be 3/11. VI. Adjournment D. Tenczar motioned and R. Lockhart seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. The time was 9:04PM.