Zoning Board of Appeals

Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes February 26, 2024 at 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 Pech, Vice Chair Callahan, Member McCarthy, Member Procope, Member Hovey, Member Nickerson Members Absent: Member Briere Others Present: Dylan Ricker, Associate Planner The following represents the actions taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the 2/26/2024 meeting. This meeting was held in the City Council chambers. Attendees had the ability to participate via Zoom as permitted by Chapter 107 of the Acts of 2022, signed into law on July 16, 2022. Chairman Pech called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM I. Continued Business ZBA-2023-30 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Wanessa Alves Santos Property Located at: 33 McKinley Ave, 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.1 Petition: Wanessa Alves Santos has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to extend a driveway that would not meet the dimensional standards of Section 6.1.10 of the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. The property is located in the Traditional Single-Family (TSF) zoning district, and requires Variance approval per Section 6.1.10 and for any other relief under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: None Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: V. Pech said the applicant requested a continuance. S. Callahan said he does not want to grant any additional Variances after this continuance, V. Pech agreed. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to continue the petition to the March 25 th Zoning Board meeting. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2023-43 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Wedman Jonathas Property Located at: 39 Corbett Street, 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Wedman Jonathas has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to construct a second story addition to the existing single-family home at 39 Corbett Street. The subject property is located in the Traditional Single-Family (TSF) zoning district. The project requires Variance approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals per Section 5.1 for relief from the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirement, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Evans Simeya, Applicant’s Representative E. Simeya said he has revised plans to distribute to the Board. E. Simeya said the size of the addition was reduced to minimize the impact. E. Simeya said the addition would not impact sunlight on the abutters property. E. Simeya said they spoke with the abutter and they are no longer opposed. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: J. Nickerson asked the required FAR relief now that the addition is reduced. E. Simeya said they are now requesting 0.3 relief. J. Nickerson said the reduced size and lack of opposition to the petition is an improvement. S. Callahan said the revised plans are reasonable and improve the proposal. D. McCarthy said the revisions were what he was hoping for. D. McCarthy asked for clarification on the FAR calculation and estimated the proposed FAR would be in the 0.8s. E. Simeya said he would have to confirm with the surveyor. D. McCarthy said if approved he would like a condition that a revised site plan be submitted with an accurate FAR calculation. E. Simeya agreed. D. McCarthy expressed support for the petition with the aforementioned condition. T. Hovey said he is unsure if he can vote on the proposal since it has had such significant changes on short notice. T. Hovey asked why plans weren’t submitted sooner. E. Simeya said they just got the plans back from the surveyor. T. Hovey said he needs more time to review the plans and suggested a continuance. G. Procope said he has some concerns about the amount of time they have been given to review the revised plans. G. Procope said he appreciates the efforts to reduce the size of the addition. G. Procope expressed support for a continuance. S. Callahan asked for the revised plans to be shared with the abutter. D. McCarrthy said he would like to see a revised plan from the surveyor showing an accurate FAR. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to continue the petition to the March 25 th Zoning Board meeting. II. New Business ZBA-2023-49 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Evolution Auto Designs, LLC Property Located at: 384 Bridge Street, 01850 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.3 Petition: Evolution Auto Designs, LLC has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval at 384 Bridge Street to erect an internally illuminated sign. The subject property is located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) zoning district. The proposal requires Special Permit approval per Section 6.3 for internally illuminated signage, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Antonio De Los Santos, Applicant Junior De Los Santos, Applicant J. De Los Santos said they are looking for a Special Permit to illuminate the sign so it can be visible at night. J. De Los Santos said it will help with traffic by making the business more visible. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: S. Callahan said the relief sought is minimal. S. Callahan said he is not concerned with the size of the sign. S. Callahan asked about the hours of operation. J. De Los Santos said they are open 7am-8pm. S. Callahan said the hours of illumination need to be 1 hour before opening to 1 hour after closing or sunset whichever comes later, and this should be a condition. D. McCarthy said the sign is in place already and does not meet the zoning requirements even if it wasn’t illuminated. J. De Los Santos said he did not know the zoning requirements. D. McCarthy said his concern is the sign does not meet size requirements. D. McCarthy said the sign is designed well and the relief is minimal. D. McCarthy expressed frustration that the signage was erected before ZBA approval. D. McCarthy said he is supportive with the hours of illumination condition. T. Hovey said he would have preferred the sign meet zoning, but will support the petition. G. Procope agreed with fellow Board members, and expressed frustration the sign was already erected. J. Nickerson said when he opened his business he was not familiar with zoning requirements either, and said the illumination will be beneficial since this area is dark. V. Pech agreed with colleagues, and expressed support for the proposal. V. Pech asked if neighboring businesses have expressed concerns. J. De Los Santos said no one has commented. S. Callahan asked about the window signage. D. McCarthy said the window signage has been removed. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Special Permit with the following condition: 1. The hours of illumination shall be 1 hour before opening to 1 hour after closing or sunset whichever comes later. G. Procope seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Variance with the following condition: 1. The hours of illumination shall be 1 hour before opening to 1 hour after closing or sunset whichever comes later. G. Procope seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2023-50 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Francisco Triana Property Located at: 26 Caddell Avenue, 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Francisco Triana has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to construct a dormer at 26 Caddell Avenue. The property is located in the Traditional Single-Family (TSF) zoning district. The project requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 from the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) requirement, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Francisco Triana, Applicant F. Triana said he would like to building a dormer in the attic space to accommodate a bedroom and a bathroom. F. Triana said the work is for the long-term tenant who has a growing family and needs more space. F. Triana said his tenants love the area and he would like to help the tenant remain in place. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: D. McCarthy said the applicant is improving the property, and the relief requested is minimal. D. McCarthy said he is supportive of the petition. T. Hovey said he supportive of the proposal since the work is within the footprint of the existing building. T. Hovey said there is no parking issue here as there is no requested parking Variance. T. Hovey asked who is managing the project. F. Triana said he is managing the project. T. Hovey asked what is in the attic now. F. Triana said it is open attic space accessible by a hatch. G. Procope expressed support for the proposal, and said the relief requested is minimal. G. Procope said he will vote in favor. J. Nickerson agreed with D. McCarthy, and expressed support. S. Callahan said he has no concerns and expressed support. V. Pech said he believes the project is a good addition to the home, and expressed support. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and S. Callahan seconded the motion to approve the petition. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). ZBA-2024-3 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Philadelphia Sign Co. Property Located at: 315 Bridge Street, 01850 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.3 Petition: Philadelphia Sign Co. has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval to erect internally illuminated signage at 315 Bridge Street. The subject property is located in the Urban Mixed-Use (UMU) zoning district. The proposal requires Special Permit approval per Section 6.3 for internally illuminated signage, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Heather Dudko, Applicant’s Representative H. Dudko said the Special Permit is for internal illumination for 2 wall signs. H. Dudko explained the full sign plans and explained some of the signage has been permitted. H. Dudko said the size of the signage meets the zoning requirements. H. Dudko explained the hours of operation, and said the illumination will benefit the area. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: T. Hovey said hours of illumination should not extend beyond 1 hour after closing, and asked if the ATM is 24/7. H. Dudko confirmed the ATM is 24/7 and agreed with the hours of illumination. G. Procope said he has no concerns and expressed support. J. Nickerson asked if it is a walk up or drive up ATM. H. Dudko said it is a walk up ATM. J. Nickerson said he is ok with hours of illumination being later since the ATM is open 24/7 and the light will be beneficial to the area. S. Callahan agreed that the ATM should be illuminated 24/7. H. Dudko said she believes the applicant will be mindful of safety lighting. S. Callahan expressed support. J. Nickerson noted the lighting is important for the area. D. McCarthy said he appreciates the signage meets zoning requirements. D. McCarthy said the ATM light being on 24/7 is good, but the remaining signage should be subject to the hours of illumination condition. D. Dudko said the bank can open with signage restrictions and return before the ZBA to address any concerns that may arise. V. Pech recommended an administrative review for the signage to review the hours of illumination. V. Pech requested this be added as a condition. D. McCarthy said there are many outstanding admin reviews and D. McCarthy said these may not be followed. S. Callahan said he believes the ATM signage should be on 24/7 and he is ok with standard hours of illumination for the remaining signage. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Special Permit with the following conditions: 1. The hours of illumination for the signage shall be 1 hour before sunrise to 1 hour after closing or sunset whichever comes later with the exception of the ATM signage; and 2. The applicant shall appear before the ZBA for a 6 month administrative review. S. Callahan seconded the motion. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). III. Other Business Minutes for Approval: 2/12/2024 meeting minutes D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded the motion to approve the minutes. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). IV. Adjournment D. McCarthy motioned and S. Callahan seconded the motion to adjourn the meeting. The motion passed unanimously, (5-0). The time was 7:43PM.