Zoning Board of Appeals

Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes May 23, 2022 6:30 P.M. Note: These minutes are not completed verbatim. For further detail, contact the Division of Development Services, 375 Merrimack Street, Lowell, MA, or refer to video recordings available online at www.LTC.org. Members Present: Chairman Perrin, Vice Chair Pech, Member Callahan, Member McCarthy, Member Briere, Member Procope Members Absent: Member Njoroge Others Present: Dylan Ricker, Associate Planner The following represents the actions taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the 5/26/2022 meeting. This meeting was held in the City Council chambers. However, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, attendees had the ability to participate via Zoom as permitted by the Governor’s 3/10/2020 emergency order to suspend certain provisions of the Open Meeting Law. Chairman Perrin called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM I. Continued Business ZBA-2022-19 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Angela Kulesza Property Located at: 239 Mansur Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Angela Kulesza has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals for Variance approval to construct a covered deck at the property. The property is located in the Suburban Single-Family (SSF) zoning district and requires Variance approval under Section 5.1 for relief from the minimum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Angela Kulesza, Applicant A. Kulesza said there is currently shrubbery and a portico where the covered porch will be located. A. Kulesza said the plan is to remove this and construct the porch which will go from Mansur Street to the side of the property facing Wentworth Avenue. Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition:  None Discussion: V. Pech said the relief being sought is minimal and will be beneficial to the neighborhood and home. S. Callahan said the porch will fit with the property. S. Callahan asked what the new FAR will be with the additional porch. A. Kulesza said the porch would add 0.0836 to the FAR. S. Callahan noted this would bring the property to a 0.63 FAR and overall would be a lot of relief, however the added FAR was minimal. S. Callahan asked if the bushes would be replaced. A. Kulesza said they plan to add smaller shrubbery at an appropriate time. S. Callahan said this should be conditioned. D. McCarthy agreed with fellow Board members that the relief is minimal and said he would like to condition approval on final plans showing the new FAR. M. Briere said he is supportive of the petition and the relief sought is minimal. G. Procope expressed support for the application and said it would not have any negative impacts. G. Perrin said he is in favor. Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Variance with the following conditions: (1) The total FAR shall not exceed 0.63; and (2) The applicant shall submit updated landscaping plans to DPD. V. Pech seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). II. New Business ZBA-2022-13 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Eric Chim Property Located at: 637 Chelmsford Street 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 and Section 6.1 Petition: Eric Chim has applied to the Planning Board and Zoning Board of Appeals to convert the existing two-family residential building at 637-639 Chelmsford Street into a three-family residential building. The subject property is located in the Traditional Neighborhood Mixed-Use (TMU) zoning district. The application requires Special Permit approval from the Lowell Planning Board per Article 12.1(c) for the use, and Variance approval from the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals per Section 6.1 for relief from the minimum off-street parking requirement, per Section 5.1 for relief from the minimum lot area per dwelling unit requirement, and minimum usable open space per dwelling unit requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Hooshi Afshar, Applicant’s Engineer H. Afshar said the applicant has been using the dwelling as a three-family for roughly the last 15 years. H. Afshar said he is now trying to legalize the unit, and has already obtained Planning Board approval. H. Afshar added that the Building Commissioner has visited the property and issued positive comments. H. Afshar said the applicant has kept the property well maintained, and noted the site has 4 off-street parking spaces and parking has not been a problem for the property. H. Afshar added the property is on a corner lot and there are frequently on-street parking spaces available. H. Afshar said there have been no negative comments from the City. Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: S. Callahan said he is not opposed to the proposal and asked whether floor plans were provided. DR said they were not, but the Commissioner has visited the property. S. Callahan said this was his only concern. D. McCarthy said the application makes sense and noted the Building Commissioner does not often issue such positive comments. D. McCarthy noted the applicant has maintained the property well and the property has been functioning as a three-family without issue. D. McCarthy asked how many spaces can fit along the property’s frontage. H. Afshar said roughly 3-4 spaces. D. McCarthy said the use makes sense and provides much needed housing to the City adding that the relief sought was minimal. M. Briere noted the favorable opinion of the Planning Board, Building Commissioner, and DPD staff. M. Briere said the applicant is seeking to right any wrongs and the property is well maintained. M. Briere said he is supportive. G. Procope agreed with fellow Board members and said brining the property up to code will be beneficial. V. Pech agreed with colleagues and said the proposal makes sense. G. Perrin agreed with colleagues and expressed support for the petition. Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Variances, the motion was seconded by M. Briere. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-24 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: JAF 27, LLC Property Located at: 175 Dalton Street 01850 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: JAF 27, LLC has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking approval to construct a new attached unit to an existing single-family home at 175 Dalton Street. The subject property is located in the Traditional Two-Family (TTF) zoning district and requires Variance approval pursuant Section 5.1 for relief from the front yard setback requirement and minimum side yard setback requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: None Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: None Motion: S. Callahan motioned to continue the petition to the June 27, 2022 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, the motion was seconded by G. Procope. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-26 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Eric Mojica Property Located at: 854 Andover Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Eric Mojica has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to construct an addition to their existing single-family home, as well as move and connect the existing garage to their house. The property is located in the Suburban Single-Family (SSF) zoning district, and requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 for relief from the minimum front yard setback requirement, the minimum side yard setback requirement, and the minimum floor area ratio (FAR) requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Eric Mojica, Applicant E. Mojica explained the proposal to add a closet, and bathroom to the primary bedroom, as well as attach the garage to the home with a playroom. E. Mojica said he reached out to neighbors and have their support. Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: M. Briere asked about the FAR for the property and square footage of the addition. E. Mojica said the addition was roughly 1000 square feet. M. Briere asked about the driveway length. E. Mojica said the driveway would be long enough to fit one car. E. Mojica said it may not be used for parking and they intend to use the garage for parking. M. Briere asked about the 4.5 foot driveway. E. Mojica said the project will lengthen the driveway to 9.5 feet. G. Procope said his questions have been answered and he is supportive of the petition. V. Pech said the relief sought is minimal. V. Pech expressed support and said it fits in with the neighborhood and noted there has been no opposition. S. Callahan said he likes the layout and asked about the applicant’s intentions for the driveway/patio. E. Mojica said that after the work is complete their intention is to use this as a play area for their kids. S. Callahan asked if the only intended parking would be in the garage. E. Mojica confirmed this. S. Callahan asked about the proposed curbcut and whether it will exceed the 20 foot max curbcut. E. Mojica said he could look at what they can do to meet this requirement. S. Callahan said this could be added as a condition. D. McCarthy agreed the project was viable, and noted the existing curbcut is roughly 35 feet. D. McCarthy said reducing the curbcut would be a nice enhancement. D. McCarthy expressed support for the application. G. Perrin said the added space will benefit the homeowner and expressed support as it helps homeowners to stay in Lowell to raise their families. Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Variances with the following conditions: (1) The curbcut shall meet the maximum allowed under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance; and (2) The garage shall be setback at least 9 feet 6 inches from the front property line. The motion was seconded by D. McCarthy. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-27 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Harbor Freight Tools Property Located at: 211 Plain Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.3 Petition: Harbor Freight Tools has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to erect an internally illuminated sign at 211 Plain Street. The property is located in the High Rise Commercial (HRC) zoning district and requires Special Permit approval under Section 6.3 for internally illuminated signage, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Pam Jagiello, Applicant’s Representative P. Jagiello said the sign will replace the Marshall’s signage, and said Harbor Freight Tools is beginning to renovate the building. P. Jagiello said the sign will be internally illuminated and meets typical zoning conditions for signage. Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: V. Pech said the signage is standard and makes sense for the HRC zone. V. Pech said the only condition he would like would be related to illumination hours of the sign so it correlates with other businesses in the plaza. G. Procope agreed with V. Pech and supported the condition for illumination hours. M. Briere said the proposed sign is consistent with others in the area and is he is in favor. D. McCarthy said he is glad to see another business outlet moving into the City. D. McCarthy noted the applicant showed restraint and it is in line with other signage in the plaza. S. Callahan expressed support. Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Special Permit with the following condition: (1) The hours of illumination shall correlate with other businesses in the plaza. The motion was seconded by V. Pech. The motioned passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-28 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Tyler Provost Property Located at: 42 B Street 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Tyler Provost has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval in advance of subdividing the lot at 42 B Street. The property is located in the Traditional TwoFamily (TTF) zoning district. The Proposed Lot A would include an existing four-family dwelling which would require Variance relief from the minimum frontage, minimum side yard setback, minimum front yard setback, and minimum lot area requirements under Section 5.1, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. Proposed Lot B would include a new two-family dwelling that will require Variance approval from the minimum frontage, front yard setback, and minimum lot size requirements under Section 5.1 and any further relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Jeff Sargis, Applicant’s Architect J. Sargis explained the proposal. J. Sargis said the applicant intends to construct a two-family on the new lot and noted the required relief. Tyler Provost, Applicant Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: M. Briere asked how the parking will be accessed. J. Sargis said the proposed lot will have an access easement for a shared driveway between the two lots. M. Briere asked if all parking was in the rear. J. Sargis confirmed this. M. Briere asked about the total parking provided. J. Sargis said there will be 8 parking spaces for the existing four-family, and 4 spaces for the new two-family, and added that all parking will be in the rear. D. McCarthy noted proposed improvements to the lot. D. McCarthy asked about the existing paving on the east side of the lot. J. Sargis said they plan to remove and add plantings here along with the area with paving along the north of the lot. D. McCarthy asked about trash removal. J. Sargis said right now the trash barrels are stored at the rear of the property and a similar system will be used for the new lot. D. McCarthy asked if they utilize city trash services. T. Provost confirmed this and the plan is to continue this. D. McCarthy noted the 1 foot 9 inch gap between the parking and the rear property line, and asked what the applicant intends to do with this space. T. Provost said the plan was to install a privacy fence and noted it would be installed around the existing trees so the trees can be maintained. D. McCarthy expressed support for this and suggested adding this as a condition. D. McCarthy said the proposal is compatible with the neighborhood and expressed support. G. Procope agreed with D. McCarthy and said the design is well done. G. Procope said a lot of consideration was put in to keep the proposal in line with the neighborhood. G. Procope said he was in support. V. Pech noted the proposal requires a lot of relief, however the applicant was conscious to make the proposal align with the neighborhood. V. Pech said there is a need for housing and expressed support. S. Callahan agreed with fellow board members and expressed support for maintaining as much green space as possible. S. Callahan asked if parking spaces will be assigned to residents. J. Sargis said they would use numbered parking with spaces assigned to each unit. S. Callahan asked about snow storage. J. Sargis said they intend to use the southeast and southwest of the lot. S. Callahan said if the snow can’t be stored on-site it should be trucked out. J. Sargis agreed. S. Callahan expressed support. G. Perrin agreed with fellow Board members, and noted the benefits of the proposal and the applicant’s efforts to offset the parking impacts. Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Variances with the following condition: (1) The applicant shall install a privacy fence at least 6 feet in height in the rear of the property. The motion was seconded by G. Procope. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-29 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Regina Medeiros Property Located at: 33 Ludlam Street 01850 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 and Section 4.3.5 Petition: Regina Medeiros has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of appeals seeking retroactive Variance approval for a pool and covered patio. The property is located in the Traditional SingleFamily (TSF) zoning district and requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 for relief from the minimum side yard setback and minimum floor area ratio (FAR) requirements, per Section 4.3.5 for relief from the accessory structure setback requirements, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: None Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: None Motion: S. Callahan motioned to continue the petition to the June 27, 2022 Zoning Board of Appeals meeting, the motion was seconded by M. Briere. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-30 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Pineapple Realty Trust, LLC Property Located at: 52.1 Bolt Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Article 12.5(f), Article 12.6(g), and Article 12.1(q) Petition: Pineapple Realty Trust, LLC has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval at 52.1 Bolt Street. The proposal includes three (3) uses on the property, material storage, vehicle storage, and material removal. The subject property is located in the Light Industrial (LI) zoning district. The application requires Special Permit approval pursuant Article 12.5(f) for open lot storage of sand or other similar materials, per Article 12.6(g) to park and store vehicles on the site, Article 12.1(q) for the removal of material, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: John Cox, Applicant’s Representative J. Cox explained the Special Permits being sought. J. Cox noted the memo related to the project, and explained the concerns raised. J. Cox said after reviewing the memo the petitioner has removed the request to park vehicles on the site. J. Cox noted there will be evergreen adjacent to the neighborhood and an 8 foot fence will surround the property. J. Cox added a berm will be built facing the neighborhood to minimize noise and visual impact. J. Cox noted there has been blasting done on the site and the blasting is permitted. J. Cox noted neighbors have not liked this and said the blasting is almost complete. J. Cox said they expect the blasting to be done this Friday. J. Cox said the applicant will erect the berm and ultimately the trees will be planted. J. Cox said crushed stone will be stored on the site. J. Cox said they will be crushing rock on the site. J. Cox said they are amenable to hours of operation and they will consider moving the uses as far from residential properties as possible. J. Cox said once work is complete the use will be passive. J. Cox said it will store gravel, and dirt materials. J. Cox said there will be some deliveries but primarily smaller trucks. J. Cox said the deliveries will go through Meadowcroft Street not the residential area. J. Cox said only 10% of Lowell is zoned in industrial and productive industrial land offsets tax impacts on residents. J. Cox said the land is vacant and the use is an improvement to the site. Matt Hamor, Applicant’s Engineer Jeremy McSorley, Applicant Speaking In Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: Brian Calhoun, 46 Crowley Street B. Calhoun asked what materials to be stored on site, specifically whether the stored items would cause odors such as manure or pesticides. B. Calhoun asked what any other relief required means. G. Perrin said any other relief means any relief in addition to the direct relief being sought. G. Perrin added the items stored would be dirt, mulch, stone, etc. B. Calhoun asked if any items will cause odors. J. Cox said there will be no fertilizer or pesticides stored and they would be willing to make that a condition. B. Calhoun asked about hours of operation. G. Perrin said this is open to discussion. B. Calhoun asked what a tight fence means. M. Hamor said this means an opaque fence. J. Cox said only the rocks from the site would be crushed nothing brought in. M. Hamor said the fence will be a solid, opaque fence. J. Cox said applicant is open to hours of operation. B. Calhoun asked how long the stone crushing will go on. J. Cox said this will go on for several months. Amy Sarris, Bowden Street A. Sarris said she was concerned about the dust being kicked up by vehicles, and had traffic concerns with vehicles driving dangerously. A. Sarris said specifically off of Meadowcroft Street the trucks have been driving dangerously. J. Cox said there will be a water truck on site to keep the dust out. M. Hamor said a stone mat will be added at the end of the drive. G. Perrin asked about the applicant providing a sign at the site. J. Cox said they were amenable to signage being added to address traffic concerns. J. Cox added that the applicant can provide a monthly progress report on the rock crushing to provide schedule on progress. Grace Calhoun, 46 Crowley Street G. Calhoun expressed concern about noise associated with the stone crushing. G. Calhoun said crushed stone is on-site without a permit. G. Calhoun asked how they will minimize the noise. J. Cox said the berm will be constructed at the beginning of the process to minimize noise, J. Cox said the rock crushing machine will be in the center of the land. J. Cox explained the location of the berm and location of rock crushing machinery. Jeff Thomas, 76 Bowden Street J. Thomas expressed concerns about the entrance/exit and that it runs very close to the railroad. J. Thomas noted concerns about turning radiuses and added there are issues surrounding dust control. J. Thomas said using a sprinkler system would be more effective at minimizing dust. J. Thomas noted how loud the stone crushing is. J. Thomas said he is glad that the truck storage was removed from the site. J. Thomas said the applicant needs to work with neighbors to address concerns. Discussion: S. Callahan asked about hours of operation for the uses. S. Callahan asked to confirm rock crushing will not last forever. J. Cox confirmed this. S. Callahan asked what will be stored, i.e. sand/mulch etc. J. Cox confirmed. J. Cox said the fence will fence off this road and said the access road will be gated. M. Hamor said the rock crusher is only to take care of rock removed from site and will be removed after the on-site rock is removed and storage bins would be added afterwards. S. Callahan asked how many vehicle trips were expected. J. Cox said a couple deliveries per week and smaller landscaping vehicles for the loam stored on site. J. Cox estimated it was primarily smaller vehicles and these would have a smaller impact. S. Callahan asked if a sprinkler system could be added. M. Hamor said this is not possible since there is no water on site. S. Callahan asked what time hours of operation typically begin. J. McSorley said currently the Bolt Street operation starts at 5:30pm and ends between 6 and 7pm. J. McSorley said this is not expected but landscaping is typically early in the morning to late in the evening. S. Callahan asked about operations during winter months. J. McSorley said their work in winter takes place on site, and busy season is April to November. J. McSorley said materials may be stored throughout winter. D. McCarthy said this petition is similar to a past application with a 6 month admin review, and suggest 7am-7pm operating hours with a 6 month administrative review. D. McCarthy asked about the topographic plan and grading of the site. M. Hamor said the grading varies and goes up and down throughout the area and plan was taken from Lowell GIS. M. Hamor said the grade will be approximately 30 feet below the neighborhood, and said the fence will go at the upper tier of the grading near the power line easement. D. McCarthy clarified there will be an 8 foot fence atop the grade. D. McCarthy asked about height of material. M. Hamor said you will not be able to visibly see the operation. M. Hamor said the trees along the easement area will remain. D. McCarthy asked about rock crushing occurring on site. D. McCarthy noted the impacts on neighbors. D. McCarthy expressed support for limitations on rock crushing hours. J. Cox suggested supplying a progress report to neighborhood providing updates on status of rock crushing. D. McCarthy asked about hours of rock crushing. D. McCarthy suggested hours of rock crushing be 8am- 5pm at least and only 5 days per week, J. Cox said they were amenable to this condition. D. McCarthy asked about the location of the rock crusher. J. Cox said the rock crusher will be moved to the center of the property. J. Cox added it would be submerged with a mini berm to minimize the noise impacts. D. McCarthy suggested a condition for a sound study on the rock crushing. J. Cox said the applicant will make efforts to minimize the noise impacts. D. McCarthy asked about equipment using the site including loading equipment and trucks. J. Cox said employees could park at the applicant’s office. J. Cox said the loading equipment would be required to be moved off-site everyday. J. McSorley said the equipment can be stored at his office on Bolt Street but preference is to be stored on the site. D. McCarthy agreed this makes most sense. M. Briere noted that residents had concerns but neighbors were not trying to kill the project. M. Briere noted the applicant effectively addressed concerns. M. Briere noted the inconvenience associated with the project and said there is a long-term benefit for the City and neighborhood resulting from the proposal. M. Briere said he supports the use as the use is a passive use for industrial land. G. Procope stated the importance of involving neighbors in proposals. G. Procope said he was glad the applicant has addressed neighbor’s concerns as best possible. G. Procope suggested a condition be added that the water be used continuously to reduce dust impacts on the neighborhood. G. Procope asked about parking area comments. J. Cox said the comments are related to storing vehicles on the site. G. Procope asked for clarity about when blasting will end. J. Cox said Friday is the expected end date. G. Procope said he wants to ensure the conditions are acceptable to the neighbors. V. Pech said his two main concerns are the noise and air quality related to the dust. V. Pech said adding a sprinkler system would be beneficial for neighbors and understands this will require additional investment in the site. V. Pech said including noise mitigation technology such as a sound blanket or sound curtain could mitigate some noise. J. Cox said J. McSorley said he would bring water onto the site so there could be sprinklers. G. Perrin thanked neighbors for attending the hearing to raise their concerns. G. Perrin noted the end results would be a more passive industrial use. G. Perrin agreed with V. Pech about creating a sound box for the rock blaster. G. Perrin said hours of operation of 8a-5p for rock crushing including no operations on the weekend or holidays are fair. G. Perrin supported a 6 month admin review. G. Perrin  said the conditions can minimize and mitigate some concerns. G. Perrin noted a more intrusive operation could be done on the site if not this. J. Thomas asked if there could be a 60-90 day review. G. Perrin said the applicant would be self-reporting, and said 6 months is what the Board can do. G. Perrin said the self-reporting will be indicative of what is going on at the site. G. Perrin said he is concerned about the front end loader, and said it is more dangerous to move this equipment on and off the site on a daily basis. G. Perrin said this should be stored on site. M. Hamor noted City has an Assistant Transportation Engineer on staff that can provide recommendations on traffic signage and they can take his recommendations. M. Hamor said there can be a site visit with Alan Heredia and G. Perrin added he would like to be in attendance. M. Hamor said the intention is to have the water truck on site when crushing is done, once this is complete there will be a water connection for the site Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the Special Permits with the follow conditions: (1) Hours of operation for rock crushing shall Monday – Friday from 8am-5pm with no rock crushing occurring on holidays; (2) A water system shall be installed on-site to reduce dust; (3) An 8 foot, opaque privacy fence shall be installed to screen the use from the nearby residential areas; (4) Traffic signage shall be installed per DPD recommendations; (5) The applicant shall appear before the Zoning Board for a 6 month administrative review; (6) No vehicle storage shall occur on-site with the exception of the frontend loader; (7) A standard watering system shall be established after the rock crushing is complete. The motion was seconded by D. McCarthy. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). III. Other Business Minutes for Approval: 5/9/2022 Meeting Minutes Motion: S. Callahan motioned to approve the May 9, 2022 meeting minutes, the motion was seconded by M. Briere. The motioned passed unanimously, (5-0). S. Callahan stated that all public comments before the Board should be either written by the commenter or stated during the public hearing. IV. Adjournment Motion to adjourn by S Callahan, seconded by M Briere. The vote was unanimous (5-0). Meeting adjourned at 8:41 PM.