City Council sets Oct. 14 public hearing on proposed zoning changes to minimum lot sizes and setbacks

Lowell City Council voted to set a public hearing for Oct. 14, 2025 at 6 p.m. to consider text amendments to Article 8 of the city zoning ordinance that would change minimum lot sizes and front setbacks in two residential zoning districts.

The proposal under consideration would raise the SFR4 single-family lot-size standard from the current 7,800 square feet to a planning-board recommendation of 8,725 square feet, with council discussion allowing the possibility of increasing the figure up to 10,890 square feet. The council also discussed increasing the front setback in the RMST (Residential Main Street Transition) district from 12 feet to 20 feet.

Council members framed the changes as a response to recent infill development that subdivided older lots into multiple new dwellings. "I just think that's too many homes for such a small area," one council member said, describing recent development on Grove Street where multiple units were placed on a former single lot. The transcript shows concern about density, parking and whether current ordinances include height limits for multi-unit buildings; council members asked staff to confirm which dimensional standards are already in the ordinance and to include height limits if missing.

Jennifer Dumont, the city’s newly introduced stormwater administrator, was presented to the council and said she aims to help "get this permit straightened out and see what storm water issues has"; her remarks were introductory and not specific to the zoning amendments.

Mayor and council discussed procedure: the motion, made by Councilmember Shane Robinson and seconded by Mr. Bates, directed advertising a public hearing that would address minimum lot size and front setback changes in SFR4 and RMST and authorized consideration of figures from the planning-board recommendation (8,725 sq ft) up to the larger option discussed by council (10,890 sq ft). The council noted that the planning board’s recommendations are advisory and the council has the final authority on adopted standards.

Council members repeatedly emphasized parking and infrastructure concerns if denser development is allowed, and asked staff to confirm how parking requirements, height limits and other dimensional standards interact with the proposed lot-size and setback changes. Several council members said they wanted the public hearing to give citizens and contractors concrete numbers to review.

The public hearing was officially scheduled and the motion carried by voice vote; the exact roll-call tally was not recorded in the transcript.