Zoning Board of Appeals

Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals Minutes 6/9/2025 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 Briere, Member Procope, Member Hovey Members Absent: Member Nickerson Others Present: Peter Cutrumbes, Assistant Planner The following represents the actions taken by the Zoning Board of Appeals at the 6/9/2025 meeting. This meeting was held in the City Council chambers. Attendees had the ability to participate via Zoom as permitted by Chapter 2 of the Acts of 2025, signed into law on March 28, 2025. Chairman Pech called the meeting to order at 6:30 PM I. Continued Business ZBA-2025-17 Petition Type: Variances Applicant: Peter Dendromiris Property Located at: 84 Walker Street, 01854 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 6.1 Petition: Peter Dendromiris has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals seeking Variance approval to add additional paving to the property at 84 Walker Street. The subject property is located in the Traditional Multi-Family (TMF) zoning district. The project requires Variance approval per Section 6.1 for relief from the driveway dimensional requirements, and any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Peter Dendomiris, the applicant. Noted that they had sent over the measurements marked on the plan. There is room for extra trees on the property. Happy to answer questions. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: Johannah Doulames of 42 Litchfield Terrace. She said Litchfield Terrace is a private way. The proposed driveway would enter and exit onto a private way. There is no existing driveway there. Discussion: G. Procope asked for clarification on the project. P. Dendomiris said the existing area already has a car that parks on it. They are trying to bring an existing spot into compliance. M. Briere said he believes they are not creating a new spot. They are just putting paving under where an existing tenant usually parks. He asked the abutter if she agrees with that assessment. She disagreed, there is an abandoned car there. She says it still presents an issue. Her husband’s car has been hit by tenants backing out of the driveway. D. McCarthy said the City has requirements for documents that are submitted for a Variance. They need to see the dimensions done by the Engineer for the project. The Transportation Engineer says there is only one area that would qualify for a parking spot. P. Dendomiris said the other area is being paved because it often becomes mud. D. McCarthy said that they could plant grass. D. McCarthy said they could have designed the area to safely be accessed from Litchfield Terrace and now they will be losing a spot on Litchfield Terrace. He would be in favor of continuing the plan. S. Callahan said he agrees with D. McCarthy about the plan needing to show the dimensions to scale. T. Hovey said there is enough pavement for multiple parking spots. Which paved area will be a parking spot, the perpendicular or the parallel area? P. Dendomiris said the perpendicular area. T. Hovey clarified that this means they will not be losing a space on Litchfield Terrace. He asked about the abandoned car on the property and if it has been moved. P. Dendomiris said it has not but that he is arranging for it to be towed. T. Hovey expressed concern that the additional pavement will be used as parking. He also expressed support for replacing part of the proposed paving with landscaping. V. Pech concurred with his colleagues. D. McCarthy asked for the plan to accurately depict the Variances asked for. Motion: DM motioned to continue to 6/23 seconded by SC (5-0). D. McCarthy motioned to continue this application to the June 23, 2025 meeting. S. Callahan seconded. The vote was unanimous (5-0). II. New Business ZBA-2025-18 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: Greg Looney Property Located at: 318 Andover Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: Greg Looney has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to subdivide the existing lot at 318 Andover Street. The subject property is located in the Suburban Single-Family (SSF) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 for relief from the minimum frontage and lot width requirements, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Attorney James Harrington, representing the applicant. They are seeking Variances for the minimum frontage and lot width requirements. May also need a Variance for landscaped open space. The client (Greg Looney) is seeking to develop Lot 2 of the proposed subdivision. The Variance is required because, in order to meet the minimum lot sizes, they were unable to meet the frontage and width requirements. There are similar lots in the neighborhood that have similar frontages. The relief is not a substantial detriment to the neighborhood. Acknowledged the groundwater run off on the property. The applicant had spoken with abutters and planned to address. The proposed development would install a recharge system and rain gardens that will mitigate the issue with runoff. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: Mike Moran 493 E. Merrimack Street, an abutter to the property. There has been significant water damage to properties in this neighborhood due to the significant downslope from Andover Street. Water regularly flows into basements. Debris from runoff would flow onto the driveways. It has damaged the retaining walls. They have faced significant issues from the flooding, runoff, frost heaves, etc. The proposed subdivision is on an elevated hillside. The house appears that it would be recessed deep into the hillside. He is concerned this will increase flooding and stormwater issues. There are municipal drainage areas, but they get clogged. East Merrimack itself is in tough paving shape. He is happy that the existing house has been aesthetically improved, but is concerned by the new building. If there is not enough parking for the new house and residents will have to park on the street. This will increase access issues as the street is very narrow. Benjamin Williams, 509 East Merrimack street. Concurred with all of Mr. Moran’s comments. He has also experienced a great deal of damage. 321 Andover Street put a basketball court in their backyard and has caused runoff issues on their property. Damage has made his home almost uninsurable. Appreciates the investment in the neighborhood. If the Variances are granted, they would like to see more thorough information about mitigation of stormwater. A new house would siginificant worsen the challenges in the neighborhood. Discussion: V. Pech asked if the applicant has any response. G. Looney said he would like to request a continuance to speak to a Civil Engineer. M. Briere expressed concerns with the excessive water runoff. Cannot pass judgement on this tonight without more information for stormwater mitigation. J. Harrington said they are looking for the requestedcontinuance to clarify how they will address stormwater mitigation. D. McCarthy said it is a tough situation in this neighborhood. The applicant is responsible to not increase runoff onto neighborhing properties. Noted that some of this runoff issue is not from the proposed lot, it is from the existing lots above the abutters homes. A civil engineering plan showing the grading is critical. The relief itself isnt significant re: frontage of adjacent properties. He would like to see tandem parking to blend in better with the neighborhood. G. Looney said he may change the plan to include a garage under. S. Callahan agreed that a continuance is warranted. T. Hovey concurred. Need an extensive engineering plan to show where the stormwater will flow. G. Procope agreed with his colleagues. V. Pech concurred. D. McCarthy clarified what will be on the plan. G. Looney said they have done the LIDAR all the way from Andover Street to show the topography. D. McCarthy suggested making changes so that Lot 1 also does not increase issues. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to continue the application to the June 23, 2025 meeting. S. Callahan seconded. The vote was unanimous (5-0). ZBA-2025-22 Petition Type: Special Permit and Variance Applicant: Huynh Properties, LLC. Property Located at: 535 Pawtucket Blvd, 01854 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 and Article 12.1 Petition: Huynh Properties, LLC. has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to construct three residential units at 535 Pawtucket Boulevard. The subject property is located in the Suburban Mixed-Use (SMU) zoning district. The proposal requires Variance approval per Section 5.1 for relief from the lot area per dwelling unit requirement, Special Permit approval per Article 12.1 for three residential units on one lot, and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: John Geary, the attorney for the project. David Huynh, the applicant. Matt Hamor, the Project Engineer. He summarized the project. Lot is almost 30,000 square feet. The only relief for lot area is 100 feet. They are proposing to demolish the existing single family home, garage, and large shed and constructing 3 townhouse style units. The property is in the flood plain. The units will be elevated off the ground. The went before the Conservation Commission and were approved. They will be accessed via a driveway on Melrose Avenue. Existing access on Pawtucket Boulevard will be eliminated. There will be porous pavers used for the driveway area. City staff comments are supportive. The proposal is modest compared to the size of the lot. M. Hamor went over the Site Plan. Got Conservation Commission approval first because that was the most critical permit. During that process they did extensive work to make sure they met environmental standards. Existing structures are dilapidated. The parking will be beneath the building. Property is mostly flat. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: D. McCarthy says he loves the project but believes the rendering does not match the floor plan. M. Hamor clarified the orientation of the buildings on the site plan. He noted that the renderings are backwards. Clarified that they can only work with the existing topography on site to meet the compensatory flood storage requirements for the Conservation Commission approval. D. McCarthy said he would like to condition a landscape plan that provides 4 shade trees along Pawtucket Boulebard. S. Callahan expressed support for the project. The relief is minimal. The Special Permit makes sense. T. Hovey, G. Procope, M. Briere, and V. Pech expressed support. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Special Permit and Variance with the following conditions: 1. Before applying for a building permit, the applicant shall submit a Landscaping Plan subject to DPD approval which will contain four (4) shade trees 2. The applicant shall submit a revised Site Plan accurately reflecting the proper elevations of the building with respect to the Site Plan. G. Procope seconded. The vote was unanimous (5-0). ZBA-2025-21 Petition Type: Variance Applicant: BCFC Park, LLC Inc. Property Located at: 278 Central Street 01852 Applicable Zoning Bylaws: Section 5.1 Petition: BCFC Park, LLC Inc. has applied to the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals to expand the existing 27- unit building at 278 Central Street. The addition consists of additional living space, and no units are being added. The property is located in the Downtown Mixed-Use (DMU) and the Multi-Family Midrise Overlay (MFOM) zoning districts. The project requires Variance approval from the Zoning Board of Appeals under Section 5.1 for relief from the maximum Floor Area Ratio (FAR) and for any other relief required under the Lowell Zoning Ordinance. On Behalf: Aiden Church, the project manager for the application. He presented the project. He began by discussing the layout of the site. They are not changing the use, just expanding the building. Received Planning Board approval last week. Approximately 650 square feet over the FAR requirement. The lot is undersized relative to the surroundings, creating the challenge to meet FAR. The applicant needs to derivce additional value from the structure to fund necessary structural repairs. Speaking in Favor: None Speaking in Opposition: None Discussion: S. Callahan said the presentation was thorough. The expansion does not derogate from the intent of zoning. It is minimal relief. T. Hovey, G. Procope and M. Briere expressed support. D. McCarthy noted these upgrades will help make good use of the property. Motion: D. McCarthy motioned to approve the Variance application with the following conditions: 1. The applicant shall submit a utility plan prior to applying for a building permit; 2. The applicant shall review with engineering and law to determine whether city should be issuing easement for the encroachment of building on Central Street and Green Street; 3. The applicant shall add a no parking sign along Thirsty First’s property line. M. Briere seconded. The vote was unanimous (5-0). III. Other Business Minutes for Approval: 5/29/2025 minutes D. McCarthy motioned to approve the minutes. G. Procope seconded. The vote was unanimous (5-0). I. Adjournment D. McCarthy motioned to adjourn. S. Callahan seconded. The meeting was adjourned at 8:21 PM.