Stackers discussed for 55 Lenox at Planning Board

The Norwood Planning Board met on Monday and for more than an-hour-and-a-half, the discussion centered around the proposed building at 55 Lenox St.

The Board ended the public hearing – meaning no new testimony will be accepted – but continued the issue until Jan. 5 for a final vote.

The project itself is for 96 units on five floors, with 106 parking spaces, provided by 68 ground-floor spaces, 38 of which have parking lifts, also known as stacker spaces.

A stacker allows for one vehicle to be stored above another but requires that the lower space be vacated to allow the top vehicle to enter or leave. The discussion centered around these stackers – both among the Board and residents – but the actual application was for a special permit to allow an extra story of height because of stormwater retention and treatment upgrades and a reflective roof to reduce the heat island effect, as per the Town’s Zoning Bylaw. The proposal is also requesting site plan review approval.

Parking was the first thing addressed by the proponent, however.

“Tonight I am presenting a revised project plan that fully complies with the Town’s zoning requirement of 1.1 spaces per unit, providing 106 parking spaces for the proposed 96-unit building,” said project proponent John Shalbey. “To achieve this, I have incorporated parking lifts into the proposed plan. Parking lifts are not experimental; they are a well-established and reliable solution used in hundreds of installations across Massachusetts, including communities such as Walpole, Wellesley, Revere, Brookline, Winchester, Newburyport, Gloucester and Nantucket to name a few.”

The Board went back and forth with Shalbey over stackers throughout the meeting, despite Building Commissioner Gary Pelletier’s assertion that stackers are classified as “tandem” parking, which is allowed under the state’s regulations and not really under the purview of the Planning Board.

“At this point, this isn’t a zoning matter, it’s a building code matter, which is actually exempt under zoning to regulate or restrict the use of materials that are regulated by the state’s building code,” he said. “Whether we like it or (not) – we don’t – and I’m speaking to the Board, it’s not something the Town can regulate or restrict under a zoning bylaw.”

Pelletier said the actual regulation is governed under the State’s Building Code 780 CMR in 520 CMR, which he said is the elevator code.

For the actual hearing, engineer Scott Henderson, of Henderson Consulting, went through the stormwater prevention plan, which he said exceeded the Town’s stormwater requirements and will reduce the runoff that currently escapes from the site. The Town’s requirements are that any new development may not exceed the stormwater runoff that’s currently existing. He said they also have to meet the state regulations for drainage as prescribed by the Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook. [The Massachusetts Stormwater Handbook is a document for stormwater management system designs and standards, and can be found online: https://www.mass.gov/guides/massachusetts-stormwater-handbook-and-stormwater-standards ]

“Those regulations would not normally apply to the project, as it is not near a wetlands jurisdiction, but the Town’s regulations ask that we do so,” he said.

Henderson said there are 10 such regulations that the site complies with. They basically amount to not letting untreated runoff off the site, treating and recharging the groundwater, managing pollutant loads, and a construction impact prevention plan. The Town’s MS-4 Stormwater permit also requires that at least 90 percent of suspended solids are captured through the stormwater mitigation procedures.

“We are providing 100 percent,” he said. “We are capturing runoff from 100 percent of the impervious surface on this site.”

Henderson also said they are using a “diffuse, highly-reflective material” for more than 75 percent of the roof.

“We meet that standard,” he said.

Board members went back and forth about the reliability of the stackers, what happens when there’s a power outage or an emergency or if “one driver is drunk”. Shalbey pointed out that there will be a key lock for residents to allow others to move their cars if needed, and there will be a battery backup, despite, he said, assertions from Norwood Light that they very rarely have power outages in the area.

Resident Mark Nardelli said he felt adding this many new residents presents a problem for the Town’s public safety departments, as he pointed to a recent Board of Selectmen meeting where a study was discussed showing the Norwood Fire Department needs more staffing – https://tinyurl.com/4jdphay4

“All these developers come in here, and they want to put a tuna fish in a sardine can, and we’re letting them get away with,” he said.

“Well you’ve got to talk to the state for that,” said Planning Board Chair Debbie Holmwood, referencing the 3A MBTA Communities Act legislation of which 55 Lenox is in the jurisdiction.

Advertisement

“No, this is the Town of Norwood, we can say no to things,” Nardelli replied.

Many residents from the Lenox Street area said they were not in favor because of increased traffic and the potential for on-street parking.

Resident Mary Coughlin said she lives at 1 Lenox Street and felt the traffic would be too much. “This will have an impact on our neighborhood,” she said.

Shabley pointed out he could, by right, put in commercial ventures like a drive-thru restaurant that would have a much larger impact than residential use.

Several residents spoke in favor of the project, pointing out that affordability in Norwood is a big problem and that increasing the supply of housing, even rental housing, might help lower the costs.

“The housing inventory in Norwood has made it impossible for people of my age or a younger generation,” said resident Patrick Sheridan, before he was cut off. “There are 199 apartments available,” Holmwood said.

“I understand that, but I will say the cost around all these apartment buildings, it is outrageous costs,” he continued. “For many of us, moving out of parents’ homes into apartments or homes of our own in this scenario feels out of reach. There are simply not enough affordable options. I believe this project creates a real solution.”

To see the plans for the project, go to https://tinyurl.com/bddack79