Minutes of the Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals for the Meeting held on

March 23, 2009

Meeting of the Zoning Board of Appeals was held in the City Council Chambers, Second Floor, City Hall, Lowell, MA, and was called to order at 6:30 P.M.  The purpose of the meeting was to hear requests regarding Variances and Special Permits from various petitioners.

Chairman Geary called the meeting to order and stated that there were a number of petitions that he expects to move forward quickly, as well as some that he expects will take a considerable amount of time; therefore, petitions will be called out-of-order than that as presented on the agenda.

Chairman asked that any one wishing to address the board should be sure to state their name and address for the record, and also sign in at the podium so as not to be interrupted while speaking.

ZB-2008-000024 (080714-029)

Petition Type: Administrative Review of Previously Granted Relief

Applicant: Splash Media Group Boston, LLC

Re Property Located at: 41 MILE AVE

Applicable Zoning Bylaws: RR - Regional Retail

Petition: Special Permit to allow a billboard according to Section 6.3.4 of the Zoning Ordinance; and Variances for sign type and dimensions according to Sections 6.3.2; 6.3.4; and 6.3.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.

Attorney indicated through letter, no work has been done yet, continue for 6 months.

ZB-2009-000002 (090209-004)

Petition Type: Special Permit - Telecommunications

Applicant: Bell  Atlantic Mobile

Re Property Located at: 141 MARGINAL ST - a.k.a 106 Marginal St.

Applicable Zoning Bylaws: INST - Institutional Mixed Use

Petition: for the installation of telecommunications antennas on an existing smokestack and an adjacent equipment shelter according to Section 7.6 of the Zoning Ordinance.

Chairman read into record.

Attorney Earl, went to planning board, issue addressed, the proposed equip shelter was in the fire line and the board made us aware, we didn’t know we were in the line, submitted new plans Friday, brought in plans.

Chairman, what has changed?

Attorney Earl, sheet 2, equip shelter is located on northwest side, prior drawings had it north/southeast section of the smoke stack, if you flip back to Z1, the left side, you can see the reference to approximate fire line, it goes up and curves to the east and goes to the rear of the facility, on the first set of plans was within fire line, worked out w/ developer to relocate.

Chairman, presentation clear, just relocating what was there?

Attorney Earl, yes, came in last time for special permit – continued/relocated to the other side, new installation on the smokestack, 2 other installations.

Mr. Belanger, recalls presentation, good presentation, only hurdle they had, no problem with it.

Mr. Cavanaugh, for clarification, new antennas, and are you adding data coverage? The actual condition of the stack itself?

Attorney Earl, no, under PCS, for transmission of data/full streaming video, 12 antennas proposed. Exhibit 13 for the condition.

Chairman, would  you agree to make a condition the smokestack be brought/repointed according to the structural engineer.

Attorney Earl, agrees to comply w/ the condition.

ZB-2009-000010 (090323-010)

Petition Type: Variance

Applicant: DRAPER EDWARD T DRAPER ALICE M

Re Property Located at: 208 TROTTING PARK RD

Applicable Zoning Bylaws: SSF - Suburban Single Family

Petition: to sub-divide the existing lot and construct a single family without the required frontage according to Art. V, Section 5.1, Table of Dimensional Requirements.

Alice Draper, 208 trotting park road, looking to subdivide property, looking to downsize.

Chairman, cut a parcel?

Alice Draper, looking to take a little from each land, daughters land and our land to build a smaller parcel. Each parcel would have 22 feet of frontage (pertaining to the memo)

Chairman, concerned w/ issues related to sewer?

Alice Draper, ran 2 lines of sewage is there, we are on wells still.

Chairman, reads City Engineer’s memo.

Alice Draper, ran 2 separate lines.

Chairman, assuming you both have sewer lines, if this was approved tonight you have to understand you have to have your own sewer on property, they must have on records whether there is a manhole on property already. Who maintains the sewer line now?

Alice Draper, just put in last year, 2 lines now, ours is capped.  We have always maintained it ourselves.

Chairman, would have to change the address, main concern is the sewer and water issue; don’t want to get into something if unaware of responsibilities.

Alice Draper, spoke w/ one contractor at the thought of maybe having proposed as City road.

Chairman, this board would require all 3 parties to sign agreement

Alice Draper, questioned doing just one pipe, 2 parties would fight over who would repair, that’s why we have our

own line, each party responsible for own line, on septic system before, 2 sewer lines now both in the same trench.

Mr. Bailey, taking area from both parcels?

Alice Draper, yes.

Mr. Bailey, taking from each lot and subdividing between, plan to have another family member buy property, existing driveway is the right of way.

Alice Draper, repave driveway.

Mr. Belanger, did visit property today, sits far back on street, variance doesn’t affect anyone, or neighbors, sewer issue here, adding third line? Still unclear, at your expense, as well as maintenance for property.

Mr. Cavanaugh, question about frontage on each property, shared driveway? Easement today?

Alice Draper, right of way I think, not recorded easement.

Chairman, could run into situation if both parties sell the house, issues lies w/ driveway, can’t be addressed tonight.

Mr. Cavanaugh, suggesting continuance, generally in favor of proposal, wants to protect in case change of ownership of properties, my recommendation, seek counsel.

Chairman, getting frontage of dividing width by 3?

Alice Draper, yes.

Mr. Bienvenue, a lot going on with this property, seems as though they want them to run one main line down the road, that’s why they said it was ledge, sit w/ engineers office and see what they want you to do, run one main line? Anyone on septic still? Have you gone to Planning Board yet? Easement on your lot 5B/5C, continue and get a larger plan.

Alice Draper, we are still on septic. Haven’t gone to Planning Board yet.

Mr. Bienvenue, common driveways in the City? Bldg. Commissioner?

Building Commissioner, not sure.

Chairman, issues board will look for, recorded right of way, some sort of easement or agreement to use driveway, sewerage issue, might as well put the water in, if you do the sewer line, should consult attorney, will need something in recordable form, have them work through some of the questions, the numbering of the house issue, not a big deal, can’t change number’s that already exist. Board requires we see artist rendition/print or drawing substantially of what your building, purpose is so what we know what we are allowing to be built. Work w/ Engineers Dept. as much as you can.

Mr. Belanger, I think there is room for the numbering.

Alice Draper, had letter signed by all neighbors for plan.

Chairman, invites anyone to speak in favor.

Erin Hirbour, 206 Trotting Park Road, in favor of petition, willing to give land from parcel, 5B, 42,000 square feet on land, plenty of land, not a problem.

Chairman, invites anyone to speak in opposition.

No one speaks. Opens to the board.

Continue to May 11^th meeting.

ZB-2009-000011 (090323-011)

Petition Type: Variance

Applicant: PALERMO BARBARA

Re Property Located at: 28 NORTH ST

Applicable Zoning Bylaws: TTF - Traditional Two Family

Petition: to re-establish the former lot line between 26 and 28 North St. allowing for the construction of a single family on the vacant lot at 28 North St.

Chairman, read into record.

Lenaia Brody, here to request/re-divide her lot, owns the lot at 28 North Street, determined by Legal Department the 2 lots merge, in order for her to construct home on 28 North street, it was determined by Bldg. Commissioner and Law Dept. she apply for a variance, meets variance, special hardship, if any other person purchase lot 28, could have built house on lot, conforms w/ zoning ordinance, a house would already be built if you or I bought that house, conflicts hardship on Mrs. Palermo, would have no detrimental affect on public, the lot is the only vacant lot in the dense neighborhood, putting the house on the lot wouldn’t change the neighborhood in any way, wouldn’t even be any additional parking, the parking would be on the property of 28 North Street, the intent of zoning which is the 3^rd component isn’t going to nullify zoning, in this case it could be concern of population, it would only be a single family house, wouldn’t change that at all, other elements would encourage appropriate use of land, conforming lot already, if you allow her to establish that, nothing would change in area except single family.

Chairman, wouldn’t that put 2 family in compliance?

Lanaia, 2 family already not in compliance, pre existing non conforming structure, doesn’t help make it any less non conforming.

Chairman, history goes way back, Mrs. Palermo owns existing, at some point she inquired vacant lot next to her?

Lenaia,summary judgment motion pending, hasn’t been resolved, variance application is for assuming lots have merged, original application, Oct. 16^th, she requested a building permit without any relief from zoning.

Chairman, as far as the parking, the 2 family uses that lot?

Lenaia, will reserve an easement for lot. Proposed gravel parking, extends over her existing driveway, would allow enough space. 

Chairman, proposed drawings of house?

Lenaia, no, just a small single family house.

Chairman, shrubbery or greenery around house?

Lenair, applicant open to that, flexible as far as conditions are concerned.

Mr. Bailey, existing 2 family? How many parking spots are currently there?

Lenaia, safely 2 spaces for 2 family, which is what they have right now

Mr. Bailey, current zoning calls for 2 per dwelling.

Chairman, actually was a building on that lot, since was raised people used as parking.

Mr. Bailey, only 2 for the current family?

Lenaia, 2 cars could park one next to another. If the variance is granted an easement will be reserved.

Mr. Belanger, new home, favorable to, would like to see existing multi have 4 spaces; eventually something will happen to that land, 4 spots on existing home.

Mr. Cavanaugh, also in favor of more off street parking for home.

Lenaia, Barbara filed for cross motion, situation in land court, is whether the lots have merged, if variance allowed, case in land court could be dismissed, its just on summary judgment motion, it could go on in litigation, whether they merged or not, application is assuming they merge.

Chairman, stuck w/ petition for a long time, usually what we have done in areas like this, if they have undersized lot we approve them because it adds to character of neighborhood, concerns w/ parking issues, if board votes tonight, can be contingent upon bringing to building department proposed plan, needs artist rendition, if you give us something and sign the plot plan and builds something different there will be an issue, contingent upon us accepting it.

Mr. Bienvenue, any way we can split lots both in half? It fixes parking issues on her issue, gives us setbacks and side setbacks of new house, lots are small all throughout neighborhood, no easement is required, look at it, try to make best of what we have, does work out, makes for a nice setup for everyone, works.

Chairman, looking at extending parking over, Rick’s idea is excellent, split down the middle, easier for applicant, easier for everyone.

Lenaia, never discussed that w/ applicant, better for us to ask for one non conforming lot then to ask for 2 non conforming lots, wasn’t discussed.

Chairman, we are all in favor and do what's best for neighborhood, Rick’s idea is great, create more parking, possible title flaws, problems down the road, 2 week continuance,

Building Commissioner, put applicant on next agenda, if they decide not to they could reapply.

In favor? None, opposition, none.

ZB-2009-000012 (090323-012)

Petition Type: Special Permit

Applicant: New England Institute of HVAC

Re Property Located at: 240 SMITH ST

Applicable Zoning Bylaws: LI - Light Industrial

Petition: to allow an HVAC school in conjunction with the existing business according to Art. XII, Sect. 12.3© - Table of Use Regulations

David Ruesso, 13 Jenness Street, Dracut, has a few letters to distribute to the board.  Propose adult school for adults for HVAC, hands on training.

Chairman, allowed use, has a shop there now?

David, start w/ basic electricity, parallel circuits, set up refrigeration units, 7 different types of furnaces, rooftop unit, to deliver hands on experience, low voltage.

Chairman, how many students?

David, 10 max students, little over 3 months of training. 30 years of experience, teaches HVAC now in Greater Lowell, teaching for 10 years, good for the City & community.

Chairman, not going to be adding any type of machinery?

David, no machinery added, only thing, has to do electric work, already pulled permits.

Chairman, significant need for it, will they get certificate through course?

David, yes will receive certification, from the state, gives tools for what they need, plenty of jobs out there, a lot of contacts in fields, feels he can help people get back to work, 3 cycles a year, no more than 10 students, evening class 6-9pm, plenty of parking, 3 nights of week, tues, wed, Thursday – no weekend classes.

Mr. Bailey, is the business open yet? Waiting to get approval from State of Mass, how many students you would get?

David, cap is 10 students.

Mr. Bailey, on the parking, where would he fall under parking regulations?

Building Commissioner, more than enough parking in area, a lot of these uses are based on so many feet per vehicle.

Mr. Bailey, great for city, supports petition.

Mr. Belanger, agree w/ Mr. Bailey, will help a lot of people, all equipment is within building already, no concerns, great petition.

Mr. Cavanaugh, agrees w/ board members, according to lease attached, 25 sq feet in basement, what is the layout of area?

David, one big open room, one room will be classroom, other room will be training room, landlord doesn’t have

access to our side. Enough equipment to satisfy 10 students.

Mr. Bienvenue, good petition, summer classes? During the days?

David, if there is a need for it – 8-12pm maybe in the summer.

Anna Lopez, great idea, Lowell is a diverse community, does need this kind of business.