Revere — Councilors at the Feb. 20 Revere City Council meeting debated repealing the city ordinance that allows mechanical parking systems, known as "stackers," with several members saying the rule has been used to win project approvals and then abandoned.

Councilor Kelly, who opened the public hearing, described the 2020 ordinance as originally intended to "address parking shortages creatively," but said it "has become a loophole that undermines parking requirements." Kelly cited two projects, at 344 Salem Street and 791 Broadway, as examples where developers proposed stackers to meet parking counts and later sought relief from installing them.

The hearing drew support for repeal from Councilor Cogliandro and others who said developers had effectively used stackers as a way to secure approvals and then avoid delivering promised spaces. Councilor Zambuto said he had changed his mind and opposed immediate repeal because it could render properties that already installed stackers "nonconforming," a penalty he could not support. Councilor Garrino Sawaya raised safety concerns around electric vehicles in mechanical stackers, saying she feared a fire in a stacker would be difficult for firefighters to fight.

No final vote on repeal was taken. Councilors agreed to send the proposal to the zoning subcommittee for further study and potential drafting of an ordinance amendment.

Why it matters: Councilors said the practical effect of the stacker ordinance has been fewer actual parking spaces delivered in finished developments and more requests to the Zoning Board of Appeals for relief. Repealing or tightening the rule would affect future development approvals and potentially existing projects with installed stackers.

What’s next: The measure will be considered by the city’s zoning subcommittee, which will study possible language and the status of existing projects that used stackers in approvals.

Quotes (selected)

"The ordinance allowing mechanical parking stackers was adopted in 2020, and it was intended to address parking shortages creatively. But it has become a loophole that undermines parking requirements," Councilor Kelly said.

"If parking promises are made, they must be enforced. . . . Repealing the ordinance would close this loophole," Kelly added.

"You make this property nonconforming property. Anybody that has parkers or stackers will be non conforming. So it's a penalty that I don't think I can live with," Councilor Zambuto said.

Ending: The city council did not vote on repeal and directed staff to place the measure before the zoning subcommittee for a follow-up report and possible ordinance language.