Zoning Board of Appeals

Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes April 8, 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: Vice Chair Callahan, Member McCarthy, Member Briere, Member Procope, Member Hovey, Member Nickerson Members Absent: Chairman Pech Others Present: Peter Cutrumbes, Assistant Planner The following represents the actions taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the 4/8/2024 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. Vice Chair Callahan called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM I. Continued Business ZBA-2023-54 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Nick Fotopoulos Property Located at: 1600 Middlesex Street 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 12.6 Petition: Nick Fotopoulos has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Special Permit approval to operate a used car dealership at 1600 Middlesex Street. The subject property is located in the Regional Retail (RR) zoning district. The project requires Special Permit approval per Section 12.6 of the Lowell Zoning Ordinance, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: None Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: S. Callahan noted the applicant has requested to continue. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, with G. Procope seconding, to continue the application to the April 22nd meeting. The vote was unanimous (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 and the applicant have incorporated the Board’s advice to reduce the size of the addition by four (4) feet. The addition will only be a second bedroom and a family room. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: J. Nickerson said that he thinks the project looks great. T. Hovey asked some clarifying questions. Site plan shows the bulkhead is being moved to the back of the new addition. E. Simeya said the project does not include a basement, just a crawl space, due to FAR concerns. He clarified there will not be a bulkhead. T. Hovey said the FAR is going to be higher than the median in the area and he doesn’t know if the proposal fits into the neighborhood. The project adds a floor that is only 1.5 feet from the neighbor’s property. He is having trouble finding the hardship as well, and can’t support the project as it is. The second story on the existing building is too much. The new addition having two stories also makes it not meet the intent of zoning. G. Procope noted that several lots in the neighborhood are under 7000 square feet. He thinks the proposed addition matches other properties in the neighborhood as well. He is supportive. It seems that the applicant worked with the neighbor’s concerns. D. McCarthy thanked E. Simeya for revising the plan and said it is a big improvement over the original. However, there are mistakes on the Site Plan that should be clarified. Site Plan shows .23 for FAR. This is the FAR of the addition only. The table should show the FAR of the building in its entirety. The bulkhead should also be removed from the plan if it is not going in. The site plan should also show the new egress stair. The proposed addition on the revised plans fits in with the neighborhood. The side yard setback on the Zoning table also needs to be corrected. M. Briere was supportive of the revisions originally and continues to be in favor. S. Callahan said he is familiar with the neighborhood. The lots are very small. The applicant worked with his neighbors. He expressed similar concerns as D. McCarthy regarding the site plan. He noted the renderings also show the bulkhead, and that they will need new plans showing it is removed. He is supportive of the application with conditions. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Variance with conditions and M. Briere seconded. The condition is as follows: 1. The applicant shall submit a revised Site Plan showing the FAR as .85, the removal of the bulkhead, and the correct side yard setbacks. The vote was (4-1), with T. Hovey voting to deny. ZBA-2024-2 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Flor Monsalve Property Located at: 123 Varnum Avenue 01854 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Flor Monsalve has applied to the Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to construct an addition to the rear of their house at 123 Varnum Avenue. The subject property is located in the Traditional Single Family (TSF) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval under Section 5.1 for the Maximum Floor Area Ratio requirement, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Cam Zarari translated on behalf of the applicant’s contractor. He noted that they originally applied to the ZBA in June of 2023 but that the plans have since changed. The project will be a 20x14 addition and a 6x14 deck. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: T. Hovey said it seems straightforward. There is only a small increase in FAR. It meets the setbacks. He is supportive. G. Procope agrees with T. Hovey. The plans are much better than last year and only require minimal relief. D. McCarthy noted that it needs side yard setback as well but is supportive. M. Briere said it needs minimal relief and is supportive. J. Nickerson said he is supportive. S. Callahan agreed with his colleagues. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Variances and G. Procope seconded. The vote was unanimous (5- 0). II. New Business ZBA-2024-11 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: Syvanny Sok Property Located at: 213 Chelmsford Street 01851 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Syvanny Sok has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to operate an aesthetics and nail technician training school at 213 Chelmsford Street. The property is located in the Neighborhood Business (NB) zoning district, and requires a Special Permit under Section 12.3(c) for the use and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Amanda Flores, attorney for applicant. The applicant owns the property and currently operates a nail salon there. She has also opened two new locations. This would be a new job training and educational program not currently offered in the city. The class cap would be 8 students, which helps address parking concerns. There is also parking on the same side of the street as the building so students wouldn’t have to cross the street. The school type is hybrid, so they will not always be there. Additionally, not all students need to do the in-person hours at the same time, which helps with parking concerns. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: G. Procope asked if the parking spaces on the left of the building belong to 213 Chelmsford Street. A. Flores confirmed. G. Procope said a there will be 8 students but only 4 spots. A. Flores said classes are primarily on weeknights when the nail salon isn’t open. G. Procope says the proposal makes sense then. D. McCarthy thanked the applicant for starting this program. He would like to condition approval on a 6- month admin review but is supportive. M. Briere in support. J. Nickerson said he is in favor. He is appreciative of having a training school in the city. He noted many students may not drive. T. Hovey said there will be plenty of parking on-street. He also noted that the City is studying putting in a crosswalk at Chelmsford and Cambridge Street. S. Callahan was supportive. He thinks a six month review will alleviate parking concerns. S. Callahan asked if there are other instructors. S. Sok said there will be one. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned, and G. Procope seconded, to issue the Special Permit with the following condition: 1. The Department of Planning and Development shall conduct a six (6) month administrative review of the school’s effects on parking in the area. ZBA-2024-12 Petition Type: Special Permit Applicant: All About Signs, LLC Property Located at: 176 Walker Street 01854 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.3 Petition: All About Signs, LLC has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to erect internally illuminated signage at 176 Walker Street. The subject property is located in the Light Industrial (LI) 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: None. Applicant did not attend. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: D. McCarthy said he is ok discussing without applicant there. S. Callahan asked P. Cutrumbes if he can do that. P. Cutrumbes said he believes they can. G. Procope said it is so minor and they don’t have questions, it shouldn’t have to be continued. D. McCarthy said he is glad the applicant has chosen to keep the signage within the dimensional requirements in the zoning ordinance. It is partly screened by the building itself. He doesn’t see this as having an impact. S. Callahan echoed these comments. No other Board members had comments. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve with T. Hovey seconding. The vote was unanimous (5-0). III. Other Business Minutes for Approval: 3/25/2024 meeting minutes M. Briere was absent at the last meeting and recused himself from the vote. D. McCarthy motioned to approve the minutes, seconded by G. Procope. The vote was unanimous (5-0). IV. Adjournment D. McCarthy motioned to adjourn, with T. Hovey seconding. The meeting was adjourned at 7:25 PM.