Historic Board approves exterior rehabilitation for former Lowell Manufacturing building at 246 Market Street; developer to convert it into 27 apartments

The Lowell Historic Board voted April 14 to approve an exterior rehabilitation permit for 246 Market Street, allowing Turbine Building LLC to convert the former Lowell Manufacturing powerhouse into 27 residential units while preserving and restoring significant exterior features.

The decision clears the way for a redevelopment the applicant said will restore the building’s historic front façade, replace long-deteriorated windows and add residential uses to the three high-volume floors that formerly housed turbines and factory operations.

Developer Kenny, who identified himself as the project developer for Turbine Building LLC, told the board the plan recreates the front wood window detailing with aluminum window systems that match the original profiles and will convert large interior spaces into six units per floor with new floors added within the tall original volumes. “So we're converting them into 27 apartments units,” Kenny said during the presentation.

Architect Rainer Koch, who described the building as a former hydroelectric plant with unusually large, half‑round windows and very tall interior halls, said the project requires heavy structural and window upgrades. “All these windows will actually be replaced with aluminum windows to authentically match the detailing of the frame, the mullions,” Koch said, and the design will use insulating glass to meet residential code requirements.

The board’s approval included conditions that the applicant provide: (1) a site plan showing parking, loading and handicap access; (2) details for parapet cap repair and any replacement pieces; and (3) refined window and rooftop mechanical details responding to earlier comments from the National Park Service. The motion was made, seconded and carried by voice vote; the transcript records the board’s vote as “Aye” without a roll-call tally.

Neighbors who spoke at the public hearing said they support rehabbing the long-vacant building but called for careful attention to noise, drainage and structural impacts on adjacent properties. James Wild, a resident of Canal Place 1 who said his unit directly overlooks the building’s roof, praised the developer’s outreach and said he was “confident” the applicant would mitigate visual and sound impacts of rooftop equipment. Danielle Sarat, another Canal Place 1 resident, urged the board and city building officials to scrutinize the adjacent party wall and interior structural problems and to confirm drainage and floor/egress safety before occupancy.

Applicant representatives said a structural engineer had inspected the building and that the team had identified and plans to repair cracks in the rear wall and other localized deterioration. They described the building’s historic roof drainage as a key technical issue: some original upper roof drains were blocked years ago, forcing runoff to the lower drains and creating ponding risk, which the renovation will address. The applicant also said the design will include two accessible parking spaces and two accessible units in compliance with Massachusetts accessibility requirements.

On rooftop equipment, the developer said condenser units will be grouped front and back and set back from visible edges; the architect said the team will further refine locations to reduce neighbor impacts. The board added a condition requiring finalized mechanical plans and sightline details to be provided as part of administrative review.

The board’s approval preserves the requirement that exterior work visible from the public way remain subject to review; the applicant noted it is also seeking federal historic-preservation tax-credit review from the National Park Service, which has already provided preliminary comments focused chiefly on window detailing.

With conditions attached, the board approved the permit; the project will next complete required building-department reviews and the federal historic-preservation tax-credit documentation before construction begins.

The board’s action was one of several taken at the April 14 meeting, which also included review and approval of a separate historic-rehabilitation proposal for 278 Central Street and several administrative items.