Zoning Board of Appeals

Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes September 12, 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: Member Callahan, Member McCarthy, Member Briere, Member Procope, Member Njoroge Members Absent: Vice Chairman Pech Others Present: Dylan Ricker, Associate Planner The following represents the actions taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the 7/25/2022 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. Member Callahan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM I. Continued Business 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 Variance approval to construct a new attached unit to the existing single-family home at 175 Dalton Street. The subject property is located in the Traditional Two-Family (TTF) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval pursuant Section 5.1 for relief from the front yard setback, and side yard setback requirements, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Kenneth Lania, Applicant’s Representative K. Lania said at the last meeting the ZBA was provided updated site plans and architectural plans in response to meetings with a direct abutter. K. Lania said the applicant is now seeking to separate the lot into two lots and construct a new single-family home. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: D. McCarthy said the sign has the old site plan. K. Lania apologized and noted the new application would be required to get Definitive Subdivision approval from which requires a new public notice and signage. D. McCarthy said what the applicant is requesting is different from the original application and expressed concern about a different project being advertised. D. McCarthy said one of the trees on the site may interfere with the sidewalk per the City Engineer’s comments. K. Lania and D. McCarthy said the tree is healthy. D. McCarthy said there may be space to save the tree to remain outside of a sidewalk. K. Lania said he is amenable to saving the tree, and is amenable to this being conditioned. D. McCarthy said he would like this to be conditioned. K. Lania agreed. D. McCarthy said the usable open space requires an offset from the property lines and asked if this was included in the plan’s calculation. K. Lania confirmed it was. K. Lania said a stormwater permit would be required as well. D. McCarthy said this should be a condition as well. M. Briere asked how confident the applicant is that he can meet the Engineering Department’s comments. K. Lania said each item can be addressed with the exception of the tree which they are amenable to working with the Engineering Department to save. M. Briere asked if there was any further discussion with the abutter since the revisions were made. K. Lania said the applicant met with the abutter again and the applicant is willing to meet the requests of the abutter. G. Procope said his only concern is from the process standpoint, specifically that public notice was different from the application currently proposed. K. Lania said this is why applications are advertised with the statement, “any other relief required”. K. Lania said he would be required to go before the Planning Board as well. R. Njoroge asked that updated comments be provided by engineering. R. Njoroge said he does not see driveway access. K. Lania said each driveway will be 12 feet wide meeting zoning requirements. S. Callahan expressed concern about the notice issues. S. Callahan noted the applicant will be required to appear before the Planning Board. S. Callahan asked if the relief requested is the same. K. Lania explained there was only a minor difference in the relief required and reiterated the application requires Definitive Subdivision approval from the Planning Board. D. McCarthy confirmed the condition that engineering update comments and noted the comments would not come back to the Board. K. Lania said comments would be used for the Planning application. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Variances with the following conditions: (1) The applicant shall incorporate any updated engineering comments into their Definitive Subdivision application; (2) The applicant shall obtain a stormwater permit; and (3) The applicant shall work with the Engineering Department to retain the tree. The motioned 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; Section 4.3.5 Petition: Regina Medeiros has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking retroactive Variance approval to legalize a pool, and patio cover which do not meet dimensional requirements. The property is located in the Traditional Single-Family (TSF) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 for relief from the rear yard setback, side yard setback, and floor area ratio (FAR) requirements, per Section 4.3.5 for relief from the rear yard setback and side yard setback requirements, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Regina Medeiros, Applicant R. Medeiros said a cover was built over the patio and the Building Commissioner said it was not built properly and should be taken down. R. Medeiros said they are amenable to this, but their concern is the pool. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: Richard, 76 Belvidere Circle Richard said he has no issues with the applicant keeping the pool, his concern is the patio cover. Discussion: S. Callahan clarified that the applicant is amenable to removing the patio cover. M. Briere referenced the letter submitted by the Building Commissioner which states the structure should be removed. M. Briere said he would side with the Commissioner regarding the patio cover, and would like additional input related to the pool. G. Procope agreed with M. Briere and asked how long the pool has been in existence. G. Procope noted the abutter did not have issues with pool so this may not be an issue. G. Procope said he is concerned about granting the Variance without the Building Commissioner’s involvement. D. Ricker explained the permit process which would require a building inspector inspect the pool to ensure it meets building code requirements. R. Njoroge asked if when the property was purchased the pool was there. R. Medeiros said it was not. R. Njoroge said the patio cover should be removed since it is unsafe. R. Njoroge asked if the pool can be moved. R. Medeiros said they will do whatever the Board requests. D. McCarthy said that based on the Building Commissioner’s comments that if the Board wishes to move forward the patio cover removal should be conditioned. D. McCarthy expressed concern about pool’s proximity to the property line and expressed opposition. D. McCarthy suggested the applicant withdraw their application without prejudice. R. Medeiros said no. D. McCarthy said he would support the petition. S. Callahan noted the required setbacks for pools and said the pool may be moved to a zoning compliant location. M. Briere asked about the building permit process. D. Ricker explained the process. M. Briere said he would not grant a Variance since a building permit was not obtained by the applicant. D. McCarthy said he does not believe the Variance criteria were met. S. Callahan said the applicant may withdraw their application without prejudice, and explained the repercussions of a ZBA denial. R. Medeiros requested her application be withdrawn without prejudice. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to allow the applicant to withdraw the petition without prejudice. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). II. New Business ZBA-2022-34 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Leticia Santos Property Located at: 1527 Middlesex Street, Unit 4 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Article 12.4 (I) Petition: Leticia Santos has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval at 1527 Middlesex Street. The applicant is seeking to do body work at Heaven’s Beauty Salon. The property is located in the Regional Retail (RR) zoning district, and requires Special Permit approval pursuant Article 12.4 (I), and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Leticia Santos, Applicant Leticia Oliveira, Applicant’s Representative L. Oliveira said the applicant is seeking a Special Permit to do body work at the existing salon on Middlesex Street. L. Oliveira said the business is primarily a salon with hair services open during business hours. L. Oliveira said the applicant is the salon owner and serves clients including makeup and would like to add permanent body work to the services. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: R. Njoroge said he has no issues approving the Special Permit. D. McCarthy asked if this is currently operating as a salon and whether the body art will be in addition to these services. L. Oliveira confirmed this. D. McCarthy said this would just be an extension of the existing business within the same business hours. D. McCarthy expressed support. M. Briere has no questions. G. Procope said he has no issues with the petition. S. Callahan said he has no issues granting the Special Permit. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to approve the Special Permit. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-38 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Steven Crowley Property Located at: 642 Gorham Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.1 Petition: Steven Crowley has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to increase the number of residential units in the existing building from 10 unit to 11 units. The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed-Use (UMU) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals pursuant Section 6.1 for relief from the minimum parking requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Steven Crowley, Applicant Norberto Leon, Applicant’s Architect N. Leon said the applicant is seeking to convert the existing commercial space into an additional residential unit with 3 bedrooms. N. Leon said the existing property does not have parking as this is the way the building was originally built. N. Leon said the property is near public transit including the Gallagher Terminal and tenants typically use on-street parking or public transportation. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: D. McCarthy said there is currently no sprinkler system. N. Leon said the intend to fire separate the new unit, and said the project does not meet the criteria that would require a new sprinkler system. S. Crowley said adding a sprinkler system would make the project unfeasible. S. Crowley said carbon monoxide and smoke detectors will be hardwired into the building. D. McCarthy noted the close proximity to the Gallagher Terminal and said the use matches the building. M. Briere said his questions have been answered and addressed by the Board. G. Procope expressed support and said the proposal is a good project. G. Procope noted the proximity to the Gallagher Terminal. R. Njoroge agreed with fellow members and expressed support. R. Njoroge asked about the existing basement. S. Crowley explained the building has 2 basements which include utilities. S. Callahan said the petition makes sense and meets the criteria for a hardship for the Variance. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and M. Briere seconded the motion to approve the Variance. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-41 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: 168 Seafood Market Property Located at: 119 Chelmsford Street 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.3 Petition: 168 Seafood Market has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval to erect an internally illuminated sign at 119 Chelmsford Street. The property is located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) zoning district. The proposal requires Special Permit approval pursuant Section 6.3 of the Lowell Zoning Ordinance, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Carlos, Applicant’s Representative Carlos said the applicant had lights on the building but the building was rebuilt and the lights were removed. Carlos said the applicant now wants to light up the sign, and noted the lighting will help with wayfinding. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: G. Procope said the request for permit sign was not posted at the property. G. Procope said since this wasn’t posted the application cannot be approved at tonight’s hearing. Carlos said he told the applicant the sign had to be posted. G. Procope said he believes the petition should be continued so the sign can be posted. R. Njoroge and D. McCarthy agreed. D. McCarthy clarified that the application would not require City Council approval as it only projects 6 inches, D. Ricker confirmed. M. Briere agreed with the Board members, and encouraged the applicant to request a continuance. S. Callahan explained the sign requirement and that it would need to be up 14 days in advance of the hearing. S. Callahan said the application should be continued to the October 13th meeting. Carlos agreed. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to continue the application to the October 13th Zoning Board meeting. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2022-42 Petition Type: Special Permit and Variance Applicant: Vinfen Corporation Property Located at: 41 Gorham Street (a/k/a 89 Appleton Street) 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Article 12.3 (j); and Section 6.1 Petition: Vinfen Corporation has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit and Variance approval to add a licensed health care establishment to the existing building. The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed-Use (UMU) zoning district. The proposal requires Special Permit approval from the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals per Article 12.3 (j), Variance approval from the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals per Section 6.1 for relief from the minimum off- street parking requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. The Zoning Board took the petition out of order. On Behalf: George Theodorou, Applicant’s Representative G. Theodorou said the applicant is requesting a continuance request to the September 26th Zoning Board meeting. G. Theodorou said he is in conversations with an abutter to address their concerns. G. Theodorou said the applicant intends to meet the stormwater requirement and include a security plan. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: None Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and M. Briere seconded the motion to continue the petition to the September 26th Zoning Board meeting. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). III. Other Business Minutes for Approval: 8/8 Meeting Minutes D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to approve the August 8th meeting minutes. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). Board members thanked Gary Perrin for his service and leadership as a member of the Zoning Board, and wished him the best of luck. IV. Adjournment D. McCarthy motioned, and M. Briere seconded the motion to adjourn. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). The time was 7:58pm.