Lowell Zoning Board approves curb-cut and parking-dimension variances for 84 Walker Street

The Lowell Zoning Board of Appeals on Aug. 11 approved variances that allow the owner of 84 Walker Street to pave space for four angled parking stalls, approving relief for curb-cut width and parking-dimension requirements.

The board approved the petition after engineers told the board the plan fits four angled spaces and the developer proposed two replacement red maple trees to offset the removal of one existing tree. The project will serve a four-unit building.

Neighbors objected during public comment, saying the proposed paved area would use and extend onto Litchfield Terrace, a privately owned one‑way street used by residents and children. Johanna De Llamas, a neighbor who said she lives at 42 Lake Trail Terrace directly across from the property, told the board the proposal “extends 3 feet beyond onto Litchfield Terrace” and asked for legal proof the Walker Street property has the right to enter and exit via that private way. She also said porches were enclosed without permission and argued the parking plan’s description online did not match what she observes on the street.

Engineer Ian Ainsley, representing the applicant, said he provided a dimensioned, engineered plan after an earlier hearing and that he “was able to fit 4 angled parking spaces.” Ainsley told the board the angled layout uses the one‑way direction on Litchfield Terrace and that “the only dimensional variance we would need to make that happen is the curb cut width.” He also said one tree would need removal and that two red maples are proposed as replacements.

Board members discussed the private‑way question, the curb‑cut width and whether the angled spaces meet dimensional standards. Member McCarthy warned that the plan does not meet zoning rules for a rectangular parking stall and that a dimensional variance for parking would be required; zoning staff later confirmed parking spaces must be set back three feet from the property line (producing a 21‑foot depth requirement for an 18‑foot stall plus the setback). Chairman Peck and other members pressed the applicant for clarification about property lines and the survey; Ainsley said the survey showed the parking would “go right up to the edge of pavement, which is essentially on top of the right of way line.”

On the private‑way legal question, Ainsley said he understood the board to be focused on dimensional relief and that access and private‑way rights were “outside the purview of the zoning board” and more of a legal matter. A neighbor cited an email from Timothy French in the City Law Department confirming Litchfield Terrace is a private way; board members noted abutters could contest private‑way rights separately.

The board voted to grant the variances for the curb cut and the parking‑dimension relief. Member McCarthy made the motion; Vice Chair Callahan seconded. A roll call recorded approval by the members present and the motion passed. The board did not attach additional conditions to the variance.

Because the decision involves a private way and questions about whether the paved area would encroach beyond the applicant’s property line, several members noted abutters remain free to pursue legal remedies. The record also shows the applicant will remove one tree and plant two red maples as mitigation.

The decision resolves ZBA case ZBA‑2025‑17 and allows the applicant to proceed with the engineering plan approved by the board; questions about private‑way access and any easement rights remain for the parties to pursue outside the zoning process.